head to head · open source

Rocket.Chat vs FluidFramework

Rocket.Chat has 46,133 GitHub stars, 13,891 forks, 4,023 open issues and last shipped yesterday. FluidFramework has 4,946 stars, 586 forks, 207 open issues and last shipped yesterday. Rocket.Chat leads on adoption by 833% (46,133 vs 4,946 stars). Rocket.Chat is written in TypeScript under a custom or non-standard licence; FluidFramework is written in TypeScript under MIT. Rocket.Chat has attracted 30% as many forks as stars, FluidFramework 12%. Rocket.Chat was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee. The two share 1 topic tag (collaboration), 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.

Rocket.Chat ★ 46K FluidFramework ★ 4.9K category Business Software

← all 8884 open source comparisons

Side by side

Rocket.Chat FluidFramework
GitHub stars ★ 46K ★ 4.9K
License Custom / other MIT
Written in TypeScript TypeScript
Last push 2026-09-17 2026-09-17
Forks ⑂ 14K ⑂ 586
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick Rocket.Chat if

  • You weight community size — 46K 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 Rocket.Chat profile →

pick FluidFramework if

  • You want the FluidFramework feature set and don't need the biggest community
  • You prefer the MIT license terms
  • Your stack matches TypeScript
  • You evaluated both and FluidFramework fits your workflow better

full FluidFramework profile →

About Rocket.Chat

Rocket.Chat is an open source, self hostable team communications platform written in TypeScript that gives organisations full ownership of their messaging, voice, and federation infrastructure instead of renting it from a closed SaaS vendor.

read the full Rocket.Chat overview →

About FluidFramework

FluidFramework is an MIT licensed TypeScript library from Microsoft for building distributed, real time collaborative web applications in JavaScript or TypeScript, aimed at developers who need shared, synchronized state across many clients without assembling that synchronization layer themselves.

read the full FluidFramework overview →

More in Business Software

Plane ★ 60K Twenty ★ 57K Odoo ★ 54K Cal.com ★ 49K cobalt ★ 43K duckdb ★ 41K

Related comparisons

plane vs rocket-chat rocket-chat vs cobalt rocket-chat vs mike plane vs cobalt plane vs buzz plane vs jitsi plane vs srs plane vs huly plane vs zulip plane vs anki twenty vs anki odoo vs anki cal-com vs anki plane vs tutor twenty vs tutor odoo vs tutor cal-com vs tutor plane vs hrms plane vs ever-gauzy twenty vs hrms twenty vs ever-gauzy odoo vs hrms odoo vs ever-gauzy plane vs horilla

More Collaboration & Communication projects

Compare either of these against the rest of the Collaboration & Communication field.

Rocket.Chat vs Plane Rocket.Chat vs cobalt Rocket.Chat vs Buzz Rocket.Chat vs Jitsi Rocket.Chat vs srs Rocket.Chat vs Huly Rocket.Chat vs Zulip Rocket.Chat vs etherpad Rocket.Chat vs drawnix Rocket.Chat vs univer Rocket.Chat vs chat Rocket.Chat vs bigbluebutton

Frequently asked questions

Is Rocket.Chat or FluidFramework more popular?

Rocket.Chat has 46,133 GitHub stars and FluidFramework has 4,946. Rocket.Chat has the larger community by that measure.

Are Rocket.Chat and FluidFramework free?

Both are open source. Rocket.Chat has no licence declared in this registry, and FluidFramework is licensed under MIT. Both are free to self-host.

What is the difference between Rocket.Chat and FluidFramework?

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

Which should I choose, Rocket.Chat or FluidFramework?

Choose Rocket.Chat if you want the larger community (46,133 stars) or its Custom / other licence terms. Choose FluidFramework if its feature set, stack or MIT licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.