head to head · open source

rclone vs ranger

rclone has 59,844 GitHub stars, 5,413 forks, 1,273 open issues and last shipped yesterday. ranger has 17,405 stars, 942 forks, 896 open issues and last shipped 11 days ago. rclone leads on adoption by 244% (59,844 vs 17,405 stars). rclone is written in Go under MIT; ranger is written in Python under GPL-3.0. rclone has attracted 9% as many forks as stars, ranger 5%. rclone 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.

rclone ★ 60K ranger ★ 17K category Productivity & Utilities

← all 20902 open source comparisons

Side by side

rclone ranger
GitHub stars ★ 60K ★ 17K
License MIT GPL-3.0
Written in Go Python
Last push 2026-09-19 2026-09-09
Forks ⑂ 5.4K ⑂ 942
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick rclone if

  • You weight community size — 60K stars and counting
  • You want the MIT license terms
  • Your stack matches Go
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full rclone profile →

pick ranger if

  • You want the ranger feature set and don't need the biggest community
  • You prefer the GPL-3.0 license terms
  • Your stack matches Python
  • You evaluated both and ranger fits your workflow better

full ranger profile →

About rclone

Rclone is an MIT licensed, Go based command line program that syncs files and directories to and from cloud storage providers, built for anyone who needs one tool for many backends instead of a separate client for every service.

read the full rclone overview →

About ranger

Ranger is a console file manager with VI key bindings, written in Python and released under the GNU General Public License version 3, for terminal users who want to browse, preview, and manipulate files without leaving a Unix shell.

read the full ranger overview →

More in Productivity & Utilities

n8n ★ 205K Excalidraw ★ 132K RustDesk ★ 124K LocalSend ★ 92K AppFlowy ★ 77K OBS Studio ★ 76K

Related comparisons

localsend vs rclone localsend vs copyparty localsend vs files localsend vs yazi localsend vs spacedrive localsend vs nextcloud localsend vs uppy localsend vs cloudreve openclaw vs khoj open-webui vs open-notebook open-webui vs khoj appflowy vs affine appflowy vs memos appflowy vs plane appflowy vs joplin mem0 vs memos n8n vs langchain n8n vs browser-use firecrawl vs browser-use n8n vs langgraph n8n vs frigate n8n vs lightpanda n8n vs proxmoxve n8n vs activepieces

More File Management & Sync projects

Compare either of these against the rest of the File Management & Sync field.

rclone vs LocalSend rclone vs copyparty rclone vs Files rclone vs yazi rclone vs Spacedrive rclone vs Nextcloud rclone vs uppy rclone vs cloudreve rclone vs superfile rclone vs Seafile rclone vs PairDrop rclone vs dufs

Frequently asked questions

Is rclone or ranger more popular?

rclone has 59,844 GitHub stars and ranger has 17,405. rclone has the larger community by that measure.

Are rclone and ranger free?

Both are open source. rclone is licensed under MIT and ranger under GPL-3.0. Neither carries a licence fee.

What is the difference between rclone and ranger?

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

Which should I choose, rclone or ranger?

Choose rclone if you want the larger community (59,844 stars) or its MIT licence terms. Choose ranger if its feature set, stack or GPL-3.0 licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.