head to head · open source

cubefs vs ZeroFS

cubefs has 5,660 GitHub stars, 714 forks, 265 open issues and last shipped today. ZeroFS has 3,078 stars, 119 forks, 10 open issues and last shipped today. cubefs leads on adoption by 84% (5,660 vs 3,078 stars). cubefs is written in Go under Apache-2.0; ZeroFS is written in Rust under AGPL-3.0. cubefs has attracted 13% as many forks as stars, ZeroFS 4%. ZeroFS was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee. The two share 4 topic tags (cloud-storage, distributed-file-system, fuse, kubernetes), 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.

cubefs ★ 5.7K ZeroFS ★ 3.1K category Data & Analytics

← all 20902 open source comparisons

Side by side

cubefs ZeroFS
GitHub stars ★ 5.7K ★ 3.1K
License Apache-2.0 AGPL-3.0
Written in Go Rust
Last push 2026-09-22 2026-09-22
Forks ⑂ 714 ⑂ 119
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick cubefs if

  • You weight community size — 5.7K stars and counting
  • You want the Apache-2.0 license terms
  • Your stack matches Go
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full cubefs profile →

pick ZeroFS if

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

full ZeroFS profile →

About cubefs

CubeFS is an Apache 2.0, CNCF graduated cloud native distributed file and object storage system written in Go, built for teams that need POSIX, HDFS, S3, and REST access to a single storage layer across datacenters, private and hybrid clouds, and Kubernetes.

read the full cubefs overview →

About ZeroFS

ZeroFS is a log structured filesystem written in Rust that presents S3 compatible buckets as POSIX filesystems over NFS and 9P, and as raw block devices over NBD, for teams that want object storage to behave like ordinary local storage.

read the full ZeroFS overview →

More in Data & Analytics

Browser Use ★ 116K Mermaid ★ 90K Crawl4AI ★ 84K Scrapling ★ 83K Apache Superset ★ 75K echarts ★ 67K

Related comparisons

mermaid vs clickhouse crawl4ai vs clickhouse scrapling vs clickhouse apache-superset vs clickhouse mermaid vs apache-pinot clickhouse vs duckdb crawl4ai vs apache-pinot scrapling vs apache-pinot firecrawl vs scrapy firecrawl vs crawlee browser-use vs crawl4ai browser-use vs scrapling playwright vs crawl4ai browser-use vs scrapy playwright vs scrapling crawl4ai vs scrapling godot vs pixijs mermaid vs apache-superset three-js vs pixijs supabase vs metabase mermaid vs echarts grafana vs apache-superset apache-superset vs echarts mermaid vs metabase

More Data Warehousing & Processing projects

Compare either of these against the rest of the Data Warehousing & Processing field.

cubefs vs ClickHouse cubefs vs seaweedfs cubefs vs rustfs cubefs vs parse-server cubefs vs Apache Pinot cubefs vs dlt cubefs vs mountpoint-s3 cubefs vs lakeFS cubefs vs hue cubefs vs bigquery-utils cubefs vs bigfunctions cubefs vs arc

Frequently asked questions

Is cubefs or ZeroFS more popular?

cubefs has 5,660 GitHub stars and ZeroFS has 3,078. cubefs has the larger community by that measure.

Are cubefs and ZeroFS free?

Both are open source. cubefs is licensed under Apache-2.0 and ZeroFS under AGPL-3.0. Neither carries a licence fee.

What is the difference between cubefs and ZeroFS?

cubefs is written in Go and ZeroFS in Rust. The practical differences are community size, licence terms, language stack and release cadence — all compared in the table above.

Which should I choose, cubefs or ZeroFS?

Choose cubefs if you want the larger community (5,660 stars) or its Apache-2.0 licence terms. Choose ZeroFS if its feature set, stack or AGPL-3.0 licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.