head to head · open source

filepond vs imgproxy

filepond has 16,393 GitHub stars, 848 forks, 142 open issues and last shipped 5 days ago. imgproxy has 11,080 stars, 776 forks, 67 open issues and last shipped 5 days ago. filepond leads on adoption by 48% (16,393 vs 11,080 stars). filepond is written in JavaScript under MIT; imgproxy is written in Go under Apache-2.0. filepond has attracted 5% as many forks as stars, imgproxy 7%. imgproxy was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee. The two share 1 topic tag (image-processing), 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.

filepond ★ 16K imgproxy ★ 11K category Miscellaneous

← all 20902 open source comparisons

Side by side

filepond imgproxy
GitHub stars ★ 16K ★ 11K
License MIT Apache-2.0
Written in JavaScript Go
Last push 2026-09-15 2026-09-15
Forks ⑂ 848 ⑂ 776
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick filepond if

  • You weight community size — 16K stars and counting
  • You want the MIT license terms
  • Your stack matches JavaScript
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full filepond profile →

pick imgproxy if

  • You want the imgproxy feature set and don't need the biggest community
  • You prefer the Apache-2.0 license terms
  • Your stack matches Go
  • You evaluated both and imgproxy fits your workflow better

full imgproxy profile →

About filepond

FilePond is an MIT licensed JavaScript file upload library for front end developers who need drag and drop, clipboard paste, API driven uploads, and automatic image optimization in one dependency.

read the full filepond overview →

About imgproxy

imgproxy is a fast, secure standalone HTTP server, written in Go and released under the Apache 2.0 licence, that resizes, processes, and converts images on the fly for web developers, platform engineers, and teams that want image processing to live in a dedicated service instead of inside their applications.

read the full imgproxy overview →

More in Miscellaneous

firecrawl ★ 182K Godot ★ 117K three.js ★ 116K ant-design ★ 100K open-design ★ 97K manim ★ 94K

Related comparisons

opencut vs filepond opencut vs losslesscut opencut vs sharp opencut vs rembg opencut vs audacity opencut vs shotcut opencut vs imagetoolbox opencut vs palmier-pro firecrawl vs godot godot vs three-js firecrawl vs gdevelop firecrawl vs monogame godot vs imgui three-js vs imgui firecrawl vs sbox godot vs bevy firecrawl vs playwright firecrawl vs crawl4ai firecrawl vs novu firecrawl vs searxng firecrawl vs postiz firecrawl vs cap firecrawl vs openseo firecrawl vs keploy

More Photo & Video Editors projects

Compare either of these against the rest of the Photo & Video Editors field.

filepond vs OpenCut filepond vs LosslessCut filepond vs sharp filepond vs rembg filepond vs Audacity filepond vs Shotcut filepond vs ImageToolbox filepond vs palmier-pro filepond vs Darktable filepond vs libvips filepond vs Krita filepond vs TagStudio

Frequently asked questions

Is filepond or imgproxy more popular?

filepond has 16,393 GitHub stars and imgproxy has 11,080. filepond has the larger community by that measure.

Are filepond and imgproxy free?

Both are open source. filepond is licensed under MIT and imgproxy under Apache-2.0. Neither carries a licence fee.

What is the difference between filepond and imgproxy?

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

Which should I choose, filepond or imgproxy?

Choose filepond if you want the larger community (16,393 stars) or its MIT licence terms. Choose imgproxy if its feature set, stack or Apache-2.0 licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.