head to head · open source

copyparty vs explorerplusplus

copyparty has 46,832 GitHub stars, 1,903 forks, 252 open issues and last shipped 2 days ago. explorerplusplus has 3,301 stars, 426 forks, 253 open issues and last shipped yesterday. copyparty leads on adoption by 1,319% (46,832 vs 3,301 stars). copyparty is written in Python under MIT; explorerplusplus is written in C++ under GPL-3.0. copyparty has attracted 4% as many forks as stars, explorerplusplus 13%. explorerplusplus was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee.

Two open source projects, one decision. Both are free and self-hostable — the differences are community size, license terms, language stack and release pace.

copyparty ★ 47K explorerplusplus ★ 3.3K category Productivity & Utilities

← all 20902 open source comparisons

Side by side

copyparty explorerplusplus
GitHub stars ★ 47K ★ 3.3K
License MIT GPL-3.0
Written in Python C++
Last push 2026-09-27 2026-09-28
Forks ⑂ 1.9K ⑂ 426
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick copyparty if

  • You weight community size — 47K stars and counting
  • You want the MIT license terms
  • Your stack matches Python
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full copyparty profile →

pick explorerplusplus if

  • You want the explorerplusplus feature set and don't need the biggest community
  • You prefer the GPL-3.0 license terms
  • Your stack matches C++
  • You evaluated both and explorerplusplus fits your workflow better

full explorerplusplus profile →

About copyparty

copyparty is a portable file server that turns almost any device into a file server with resumable uploads and downloads through any web browser, built for self hosters, homelab operators, NAS owners and anyone who wants to share files directly from their own hardware.

read the full copyparty overview →

About explorerplusplus

Explorer++ is a lightweight, fast and completely portable open source file manager for Windows, written in C++ and licensed under GPL 3.0, aimed at Windows users who want tabbed browsing and more advanced file operations than the built in File Explorer provides.

read the full explorerplusplus overview →

More in Productivity & Utilities

n8n ★ 206K Excalidraw ★ 133K RustDesk ★ 125K LocalSend ★ 93K AppFlowy ★ 77K OBS Studio ★ 77K

Related comparisons

localsend vs copyparty localsend vs rclone localsend vs files localsend vs yazi localsend vs spacedrive localsend vs nextcloud localsend vs uppy localsend vs cloudreve openclaw vs khoj open-webui vs open-notebook open-webui vs khoj appflowy vs affine appflowy vs memos appflowy vs plane appflowy vs joplin mem0 vs memos n8n vs langchain n8n vs browser-use firecrawl vs browser-use n8n vs langgraph n8n vs frigate n8n vs lightpanda n8n vs proxmoxve n8n vs activepieces

More File Management & Sync projects

Compare either of these against the rest of the File Management & Sync field.

copyparty vs LocalSend copyparty vs rclone copyparty vs Files copyparty vs yazi copyparty vs Spacedrive copyparty vs Nextcloud copyparty vs uppy copyparty vs cloudreve copyparty vs superfile copyparty vs ranger copyparty vs Seafile copyparty vs PairDrop

Frequently asked questions

Is copyparty or explorerplusplus more popular?

copyparty has 46,832 GitHub stars and explorerplusplus has 3,301. copyparty has the larger community by that measure.

Are copyparty and explorerplusplus free?

Both are open source. copyparty is licensed under MIT and explorerplusplus under GPL-3.0. Neither carries a licence fee.

What is the difference between copyparty and explorerplusplus?

copyparty is written in Python and explorerplusplus in C++. The practical differences are community size, licence terms, language stack and release cadence — all compared in the table above.

Which should I choose, copyparty or explorerplusplus?

Choose copyparty if you want the larger community (46,832 stars) or its MIT licence terms. Choose explorerplusplus if its feature set, stack or GPL-3.0 licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.