head to head · open source

OpenTofu vs cds

OpenTofu has 30,209 GitHub stars, 1,368 forks, 320 open issues and last shipped yesterday. cds has 4,843 stars, 453 forks, 160 open issues and last shipped yesterday. OpenTofu leads on adoption by 524% (30,209 vs 4,843 stars). OpenTofu is written in Go under MPL-2.0; cds is written in Go under BSD-3-Clause. OpenTofu has attracted 5% as many forks as stars, cds 9%. OpenTofu 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.

OpenTofu ★ 30K cds ★ 4.8K category Infrastructure & Operations

← all 8884 open source comparisons

Side by side

OpenTofu cds
GitHub stars ★ 30K ★ 4.8K
License MPL-2.0 BSD-3-Clause
Written in Go Go
Last push 2026-09-17 2026-09-17
Forks ⑂ 1.4K ⑂ 453
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick OpenTofu if

  • You weight community size — 30K stars and counting
  • You want the MPL-2.0 license terms
  • Your stack matches Go
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full OpenTofu profile →

pick cds if

  • You want the cds feature set and don't need the biggest community
  • You prefer the BSD-3-Clause license terms
  • Your stack matches Go
  • You evaluated both and cds fits your workflow better

full cds profile →

About OpenTofu

OpenTofu is an open source infrastructure as code (IaC) tool that enables users to define and manage cloud and on premises infrastructure using declarative configuration files. It lives in the cloud infrastructure management ecosystem and serves as a community driven fork of Terraform, maintaining compatibility with Terraform’s configuration language and provider ecosystem while operating under the MPL 2.0 license.

read the full OpenTofu overview →

About cds

CDS is an open source, enterprise grade continuous delivery and DevOps automation platform written in Go, for teams that build, run and own their own CI/CD workflows and want to script and scale them without depending on a hosted vendor.

read the full cds overview →

More in Infrastructure & Operations

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

Related comparisons

kong vs opentofu trivy vs opentofu kong vs trivy kong vs jenkins kong vs pulumi kong vs floci kong vs argo-cd kong vs sops 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.

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

Frequently asked questions

Is OpenTofu or cds more popular?

OpenTofu has 30,209 GitHub stars and cds has 4,843. OpenTofu has the larger community by that measure.

Are OpenTofu and cds free?

Both are open source. OpenTofu is licensed under MPL-2.0 and cds under BSD-3-Clause. Neither carries a licence fee.

What is the difference between OpenTofu and cds?

OpenTofu is written in Go and cds 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, OpenTofu or cds?

Choose OpenTofu if you want the larger community (30,209 stars) or its MPL-2.0 licence terms. Choose cds if its feature set, stack or BSD-3-Clause licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.