head to head · open source

Files vs MaterialFiles

Files has 45,602 GitHub stars, 2,931 forks, 458 open issues and last shipped today. MaterialFiles has 9,022 stars, 738 forks, 611 open issues and last shipped 2 days ago. Files leads on adoption by 405% (45,602 vs 9,022 stars). Files is written in C# under MIT; MaterialFiles is written in Kotlin under GPL-3.0. Files has attracted 6% as many forks as stars, MaterialFiles 8%. Files was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee. The two share 1 topic tag (file-manager), 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.

Files ★ 46K MaterialFiles ★ 9.0K category Productivity & Utilities

← all 20902 open source comparisons

Side by side

Files MaterialFiles
GitHub stars ★ 46K ★ 9.0K
License MIT GPL-3.0
Written in C# Kotlin
Last push 2026-09-22 2026-09-20
Forks ⑂ 2.9K ⑂ 738
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick Files if

  • You weight community size — 46K stars and counting
  • You want the MIT license terms
  • Your stack matches C#
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full Files profile →

pick MaterialFiles if

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

full MaterialFiles profile →

About Files

Files is a modern, MIT licensed file manager for Windows, written in C and maintained by an open source community, for Windows users who want a customizable, actively developed alternative for organising files and folders.

read the full Files overview →

About MaterialFiles

Material Files is a free, open source Material Design file manager for Android 5.0 and later, aimed at Android users who want to browse, manage and modify files — including files that require root access — without handing full device access to a closed source app.

read the full MaterialFiles overview →

More in Productivity & Utilities

n8n ★ 206K Excalidraw ★ 133K RustDesk ★ 124K LocalSend ★ 92K AppFlowy ★ 77K OBS Studio ★ 77K

Related comparisons

localsend vs files localsend vs rclone localsend vs copyparty 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.

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

Frequently asked questions

Is Files or MaterialFiles more popular?

Files has 45,602 GitHub stars and MaterialFiles has 9,022. Files has the larger community by that measure.

Are Files and MaterialFiles free?

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

What is the difference between Files and MaterialFiles?

Files is written in C# and MaterialFiles in Kotlin. The practical differences are community size, licence terms, language stack and release cadence — all compared in the table above.

Which should I choose, Files or MaterialFiles?

Choose Files if you want the larger community (45,602 stars) or its MIT licence terms. Choose MaterialFiles if its feature set, stack or GPL-3.0 licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.