head to head · open source

kong vs gocd

kong has 44,147 GitHub stars, 5,210 forks, 200 open issues and last shipped 11 days ago. gocd has 7,434 stars, 980 forks, 83 open issues and last shipped yesterday. kong leads on adoption by 494% (44,147 vs 7,434 stars). kong is written in Lua under Apache-2.0; gocd is written in Java under Apache-2.0. kong has attracted 12% as many forks as stars, gocd 13%. gocd was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee.

Two open source projects, one decision. Both are free and self-hostable — the differences are community size, license terms, language stack and release pace.

kong ★ 44K gocd ★ 7.4K category Infrastructure & Operations

← all 8884 open source comparisons

Side by side

kong gocd
GitHub stars ★ 44K ★ 7.4K
License Apache-2.0 Apache-2.0
Written in Lua Java
Last push 2026-09-07 2026-09-17
Forks ⑂ 5.2K ⑂ 980
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick kong if

  • You weight community size — 44K stars and counting
  • You want the Apache-2.0 license terms
  • Your stack matches Lua
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full kong profile →

pick gocd if

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

full gocd profile →

About kong

Kong (also known as Kong Gateway) is an open source, cloud native, platform agnostic API, LLM, and MCP gateway, licensed under Apache 2.0, built for platform, DevOps, and AI engineering teams that need a single high performance layer to route, secure, and observe both conventional API traffic and agentic LLM traffic.

read the full kong overview →

About gocd

GoCD is an open source continuous delivery server, licensed under Apache 2.0 and sponsored by Thoughtworks, Inc., that automates and streamlines the build test release cycle for teams that want to model, run, and control their own delivery pipelines.

read the full gocd overview →

More in Infrastructure & Operations

Immich ★ 114K Uptime Kuma ★ 91K worldmonitor ★ 87K mall ★ 85K NetData ★ 81K Elasticsearch ★ 78K

Related comparisons

kong vs trivy kong vs opentofu kong vs jenkins kong vs pulumi kong vs floci kong vs argo-cd kong vs sops trivy vs opentofu uptime-kuma vs worldmonitor uptime-kuma vs netdata uptime-kuma vs grafana worldmonitor vs netdata worldmonitor vs grafana netdata vs grafana uptime-kuma vs huginn worldmonitor vs huginn immich vs paperless-ngx immich vs ceph immich vs filestash immich vs garage immich vs storj immich vs alarik immich vs spinifex paperless-ngx vs ceph

More Cloud Infrastructure Management projects

Compare either of these against the rest of the Cloud Infrastructure Management field.

kong vs trivy kong vs OpenTofu kong vs jenkins kong vs Pulumi kong vs floci kong vs argo-cd kong vs sops kong vs wtf kong vs dagger kong vs task kong vs aws-cdk kong vs infracost

Frequently asked questions

Is kong or gocd more popular?

kong has 44,147 GitHub stars and gocd has 7,434. kong has the larger community by that measure.

Are kong and gocd free?

Both are open source. kong is licensed under Apache-2.0 and gocd under Apache-2.0. Neither carries a licence fee.

What is the difference between kong and gocd?

kong is written in Lua and gocd in Java. The practical differences are community size, licence terms, language stack and release cadence — all compared in the table above.

Which should I choose, kong or gocd?

Choose kong if you want the larger community (44,147 stars) or its Apache-2.0 licence terms. Choose gocd if its feature set, stack or Apache-2.0 licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.