head to head · open source
workflow-core vs Slickflow
workflow-core has 5,939 GitHub stars, 1,260 forks, 133 open issues and last shipped 2 days ago. Slickflow has 923 stars, 265 forks, 11 open issues and last shipped 4 months ago. workflow-core leads on adoption by 543% (5,939 vs 923 stars). workflow-core is written in C# under MIT; Slickflow is written in C# under MIT. workflow-core has attracted 21% as many forks as stars, Slickflow 29%. workflow-core was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee. The two share 1 topic tag (workflow-engine), 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.
← all 20902 open source comparisons
Side by side
| workflow-core | Slickflow | |
|---|---|---|
| GitHub stars | ★ 5.9K | ★ 923 |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Written in | C# | C# |
| Last push | 2026-11-03 | 2026-06-24 |
| Forks | ⑂ 1.3K | ⑂ 265 |
| Self-hosting | Yes | Yes |
| Data ownership | Your server | Your server |
pick workflow-core if
- You weight community size — 5.9K stars and counting
- You want the MIT license terms
- Your stack matches C#
- You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance
pick Slickflow if
- You want the Slickflow feature set and don't need the biggest community
- You prefer the MIT license terms
- Your stack matches C#
- You evaluated both and Slickflow fits your workflow better
About workflow-core
Workflow Core Workflow Core is a light weight embeddable workflow engine targeting .NET Standard. Think: long running processes with multiple tasks that need to track state. It supports pluggable persistence and concurrency providers to allow for multi node clusters. Announcements New related project: Conductor Conductor is a stand alone workflow server as opposed to a library that uses Workflow Core internally. It exposes an API that allows you to store workflow definitions, track running workflows, manage events and define custom steps and scripts for usage in your workflows. Documentation See Tutorial here…
read the full workflow-core overview →
About Slickflow
Slickflow Current Version: NET8 1. 🤖 AI Powered Workflow Automation SlickFlow: Intelligent Workflow Automation with Large Language Models Slickflow integrates cutting edge Large Language Model (LLM) nodes directly into BPMN workflows, enabling advanced conversational reasoning, RAG (Retrieval Augmented Generation), image understanding and other AI capabilities as first class workflow steps . This transforms traditional workflow systems into dynamic, AI driven orchestration platforms. 1.1 Native LLM Node Integration Add LLM / RAG / Agent nodes into your process diagrams as easily as traditional service tasks…
read the full Slickflow overview →
More in Infrastructure & Operations
Related comparisons
More Orchestration & Scheduling projects
Compare either of these against the rest of the Orchestration & Scheduling field.
Frequently asked questions
Is workflow-core or Slickflow more popular?
workflow-core has 5,939 GitHub stars and Slickflow has 923. workflow-core has the larger community by that measure.
Are workflow-core and Slickflow free?
Both are open source. workflow-core is licensed under MIT and Slickflow under MIT. Neither carries a licence fee.
What is the difference between workflow-core and Slickflow?
workflow-core is written in C# and Slickflow in C#. The practical differences are community size, licence terms, language stack and release cadence — all compared in the table above.
Which should I choose, workflow-core or Slickflow?
Choose workflow-core if you want the larger community (5,939 stars) or its MIT licence terms. Choose Slickflow if its feature set, stack or MIT licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.