head to head · open source

flowable-engine vs workflow-core

flowable-engine has 9,542 GitHub stars, 2,890 forks, 411 open issues and last shipped 3 days ago. workflow-core has 5,926 stars, 1,262 forks, 133 open issues and last shipped 4 days ago. flowable-engine leads on adoption by 61% (9,542 vs 5,926 stars). flowable-engine is written in Java under Apache-2.0; workflow-core is written in C# under MIT. flowable-engine has attracted 30% as many forks as stars, workflow-core 21%. flowable-engine was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee. The two share 2 topic tags (workflow, workflow-engine), 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.

flowable-engine ★ 9.5K workflow-core ★ 5.9K category Infrastructure & Operations

← all 20902 open source comparisons

Side by side

flowable-engine workflow-core
GitHub stars ★ 9.5K ★ 5.9K
License Apache-2.0 MIT
Written in Java C#
Last push 2026-09-17 2026-09-16
Forks ⑂ 2.9K ⑂ 1.3K
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick flowable-engine if

  • You weight community size — 9.5K stars and counting
  • You want the Apache-2.0 license terms
  • Your stack matches Java
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full flowable-engine profile →

pick workflow-core if

  • You want the workflow-core feature set and don't need the biggest community
  • You prefer the MIT license terms
  • Your stack matches C#
  • You evaluated both and workflow-core fits your workflow better

full workflow-core profile →

About flowable-engine

Flowable is an open source workflow and Business Process Management platform written in Java and distributed under the Apache 2.0 license. It bundles three engines in one project: a BPMN process engine, a CMMN case engine, and a DMN rule engine. The project lives in the Java ecosystem, integrates with Spring, and exposes both a Java API and a REST API for orchestrating human or system activities.

read the full flowable-engine overview →

About workflow-core

Workflow Core is a lightweight, embeddable workflow engine targeting .NET Standard, written in C and released under the MIT license. It lives in the .NET ecosystem, distributed as NuGet packages, and is built around the idea of long running processes that contain multiple tasks and must track their state between steps. Rather than running as a separate server, it is a library that is hosted inside an application, and it exposes a fluent C API for defining workflows. Workflows are expressed as a starting step followed by chained steps, and the same class can declare inputs and outputs that move data from one step …

read the full workflow-core overview →

More in Infrastructure & Operations

kubernetes ★ 128K Immich ★ 115K frp ★ 110K Uptime Kuma ★ 92K worldmonitor ★ 87K mall ★ 85K

Related comparisons

n8n vs kestra langchain vs haystack kubernetes vs rancher ansible vs compose ansible vs conductor ansible vs xxl-job ansible vs gitleaks ansible vs kestra n8n vs huginn uptime-kuma vs worldmonitor uptime-kuma vs netdata uptime-kuma vs grafana worldmonitor vs netdata worldmonitor vs grafana uptime-kuma vs prometheus netdata vs grafana kubernetes vs docker kubernetes vs kong kubernetes vs portainer kubernetes vs trivy kubernetes vs opentofu kubernetes vs jenkins kubernetes vs pulumi kubernetes vs floci

More Orchestration & Scheduling projects

Compare either of these against the rest of the Orchestration & Scheduling field.

flowable-engine vs ansible flowable-engine vs compose flowable-engine vs conductor flowable-engine vs xxl-job flowable-engine vs gitleaks flowable-engine vs Kestra flowable-engine vs haystack flowable-engine vs rancher flowable-engine vs Prefect flowable-engine vs Archon flowable-engine vs Temporal flowable-engine vs rowboat

Frequently asked questions

Is flowable-engine or workflow-core more popular?

flowable-engine has 9,542 GitHub stars and workflow-core has 5,926. flowable-engine has the larger community by that measure.

Are flowable-engine and workflow-core free?

Both are open source. flowable-engine is licensed under Apache-2.0 and workflow-core under MIT. Neither carries a licence fee.

What is the difference between flowable-engine and workflow-core?

flowable-engine is written in Java and workflow-core 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, flowable-engine or workflow-core?

Choose flowable-engine if you want the larger community (9,542 stars) or its Apache-2.0 licence terms. Choose workflow-core if its feature set, stack or MIT licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.