head to head · open source

Inngest vs obelisk

Inngest has 5,853 GitHub stars, 358 forks, 234 open issues and last shipped yesterday. obelisk has 755 stars, 19 forks, 2 open issues and last shipped today. Inngest leads on adoption by 675% (5,853 vs 755 stars). Inngest is written in Go under a custom or non-standard licence; obelisk is written in Rust under AGPL-3.0. Inngest has attracted 6% as many forks as stars, obelisk 3%. obelisk was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee. The two share 1 topic tag (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.

Inngest ★ 5.9K obelisk ★ 755 category Infrastructure & Operations

← all 20902 open source comparisons

Side by side

Inngest obelisk
GitHub stars ★ 5.9K ★ 755
License Custom / other AGPL-3.0
Written in Go Rust
Last push 2026-09-19 2026-09-20
Forks ⑂ 358 ⑂ 19
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick Inngest if

  • You weight community size — 5.9K stars and counting
  • You want the Custom / other license terms
  • Your stack matches Go
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full Inngest profile →

pick obelisk if

  • You want the obelisk 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 obelisk fits your workflow better

full obelisk profile →

About Inngest

Inngest is an open source workflow orchestration platform that lets developers write durable, event driven step functions in their existing language SDKs and run them on serverless, long running servers, or the edge.

read the full Inngest overview →

About obelisk

Obelisk is a durable and deterministic workflow engine written in Rust and built on the WASM Component Model, aimed at developers who need replayable, crash resilient background jobs, periodic tasks, batch work, and webhook driven pipelines.

read the full obelisk 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.

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

Frequently asked questions

Is Inngest or obelisk more popular?

Inngest has 5,853 GitHub stars and obelisk has 755. Inngest has the larger community by that measure.

Are Inngest and obelisk free?

Both are open source. Inngest has no licence declared in this registry, and obelisk is licensed under AGPL-3.0. Both are free to self-host.

What is the difference between Inngest and obelisk?

Inngest is written in Go and obelisk 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, Inngest or obelisk?

Choose Inngest if you want the larger community (5,853 stars) or its Custom / other licence terms. Choose obelisk if its feature set, stack or AGPL-3.0 licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.