head to head · open source

copyparty vs hfs

copyparty has 46,765 GitHub stars, 1,905 forks, 252 open issues and last shipped 3 days ago. hfs has 3,915 stars, 371 forks, 17 open issues and last shipped yesterday. copyparty leads on adoption by 1,095% (46,765 vs 3,915 stars). copyparty is written in Python under MIT; hfs is written in TypeScript under GPL-3.0. copyparty has attracted 4% as many forks as stars, hfs 9%. hfs was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee. The two share 2 topic tags (file-server, file-sharing), so they are genuine substitutes rather than adjacent tools.

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 hfs ★ 3.9K category Productivity & Utilities

← all 20902 open source comparisons

Side by side

copyparty hfs
GitHub stars ★ 47K ★ 3.9K
License MIT GPL-3.0
Written in Python TypeScript
Last push 2026-09-20 2026-09-22
Forks ⑂ 1.9K ⑂ 371
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 hfs if

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

full hfs 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 hfs

HFS is a TypeScript web file server under the GPL 3.0 licence that turns a computer running Windows, Linux, macOS, FreeBSD or Android into a file sharing server whose folders and individual files are reachable from any browser.

read the full hfs overview →

More in Productivity & Utilities

n8n ★ 206K Excalidraw ★ 133K RustDesk ★ 124K LocalSend ★ 92K 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 hfs more popular?

copyparty has 46,765 GitHub stars and hfs has 3,915. copyparty has the larger community by that measure.

Are copyparty and hfs free?

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

What is the difference between copyparty and hfs?

copyparty is written in Python and hfs in TypeScript. 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 hfs?

Choose copyparty if you want the larger community (46,765 stars) or its MIT licence terms. Choose hfs if its feature set, stack or GPL-3.0 licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.