head to head · open source

NocoDB vs juicefs

NocoDB has 64,998 GitHub stars, 5,054 forks, 710 open issues and last shipped yesterday. juicefs has 14,436 stars, 1,288 forks, 203 open issues and last shipped yesterday. NocoDB leads on adoption by 350% (64,998 vs 14,436 stars). NocoDB is written in TypeScript under a custom or non-standard licence; juicefs is written in Go under Apache-2.0. NocoDB has attracted 8% as many forks as stars, juicefs 9%. NocoDB 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.

NocoDB ★ 65K juicefs ★ 14K category Infrastructure & Operations

← all 8884 open source comparisons

Side by side

NocoDB juicefs
GitHub stars ★ 65K ★ 14K
License Custom / other Apache-2.0
Written in TypeScript Go
Last push 2026-09-17 2026-09-17
Forks ⑂ 5.1K ⑂ 1.3K
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick NocoDB if

  • You weight community size — 65K stars and counting
  • You want the Custom / other license terms
  • Your stack matches TypeScript
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full NocoDB profile →

pick juicefs if

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

full juicefs profile →

About NocoDB

NocoDB is a free and self hostable open source Airtable alternative that turns an existing relational database into an intuitive spreadsheet interface, built for teams who want no code data management without moving their data into a hosted SaaS product.

read the full NocoDB overview →

About juicefs

JuiceFS is a Go based, Apache 2.0 distributed POSIX file system that stores file data in object storage and metadata in a database engine such as Redis, MySQL, SQLite, or TiKV, and it is aimed at cloud native infrastructure, big data, machine learning, and AI workloads.

read the full juicefs overview →

More in Infrastructure & Operations

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

Related comparisons

mall vs nocodb prometheus vs nocodb mall vs prometheus mall vs etcd mall vs dbeaver mall vs orm mall vs milvus mall vs tidb 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 Databases projects

Compare either of these against the rest of the Databases field.

NocoDB vs mall NocoDB vs Prometheus NocoDB vs etcd NocoDB vs DBeaver NocoDB vs orm NocoDB vs Milvus NocoDB vs TiDB NocoDB vs drawDB NocoDB vs typeorm NocoDB vs AnotherRedisDesktopManager NocoDB vs Qdrant NocoDB vs rocksdb

Frequently asked questions

Is NocoDB or juicefs more popular?

NocoDB has 64,998 GitHub stars and juicefs has 14,436. NocoDB has the larger community by that measure.

Are NocoDB and juicefs free?

Both are open source. NocoDB has no licence declared in this registry, and juicefs is licensed under Apache-2.0. Both are free to self-host.

What is the difference between NocoDB and juicefs?

NocoDB is written in TypeScript and juicefs in Go. The practical differences are community size, licence terms, language stack and release cadence — all compared in the table above.

Which should I choose, NocoDB or juicefs?

Choose NocoDB if you want the larger community (64,998 stars) or its Custom / other licence terms. Choose juicefs if its feature set, stack or Apache-2.0 licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.