head to head · open source

frp vs numa

frp has 109,688 GitHub stars, 15,230 forks, 48 open issues and last shipped 14 days ago. numa has 1,513 stars, 107 forks, 28 open issues and last shipped yesterday. frp leads on adoption by 7,150% (109,688 vs 1,513 stars). frp is written in Go under Apache-2.0; numa is written in Rust under MIT. frp has attracted 14% as many forks as stars, numa 7%. numa was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee. The two share 1 topic tag (reverse-proxy), 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.

frp ★ 110K numa ★ 1.5K category Infrastructure & Operations

← all 20902 open source comparisons

Side by side

frp numa
GitHub stars ★ 110K ★ 1.5K
License Apache-2.0 MIT
Written in Go Rust
Last push 2026-09-15 2026-09-28
Forks ⑂ 15K ⑂ 107
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick frp if

  • You weight community size — 110K 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 frp profile →

pick numa if

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

full numa profile →

About frp

frp is a fast reverse proxy written in Go that exposes a local server behind a NAT or firewall to the internet, built for operators and developers who need inbound access to machines they cannot port forward.

read the full frp overview →

About numa

numa is a portable DNS resolver written in Rust and shipped as a single roughly 8 MB binary, aimed at developers, self hosters and privacy conscious laptop users who want ad blocking, .numa local service names, hostname overrides and ODoH encrypted upstream queries without a cloud account or a Raspberry Pi.

read the full numa overview →

More in Infrastructure & Operations

kubernetes ★ 128K Immich ★ 115K Uptime Kuma ★ 92K worldmonitor ★ 88K mall ★ 85K NetData ★ 81K

Related comparisons

frp vs caddy frp vs traefik frp vs adguardhome frp vs nginx frp vs algo frp vs nginx-proxy frp vs plakar frp vs pluton caddy vs traefik immich vs openvpn 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 n8n vs kestra langchain vs haystack kubernetes vs rancher ansible vs compose ansible vs conductor ansible vs xxl-job

More Networking & Connectivity projects

Compare either of these against the rest of the Networking & Connectivity field.

frp vs caddy frp vs traefik frp vs AdGuardHome frp vs nginx frp vs algo frp vs nginx-proxy frp vs goproxy frp vs openvpn-install frp vs cloudflared frp vs amnezia-client frp vs OpenVPN frp vs coredns

Frequently asked questions

Is frp or numa more popular?

frp has 109,688 GitHub stars and numa has 1,513. frp has the larger community by that measure.

Are frp and numa free?

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

What is the difference between frp and numa?

frp is written in Go and numa 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, frp or numa?

Choose frp if you want the larger community (109,688 stars) or its Apache-2.0 licence terms. Choose numa if its feature set, stack or MIT licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.