FindAlternative
Sign in
Back to cloudreve

cloudreve vs filebrowser

Side-by-side comparison of features, pricing, ratings, and alternatives.

Compare
cloudreve
cloudreveSelf‑hosted cloud storage for individuals and small teams
Visit
filebrowser
filebrowserSelf‑hosted web file manager for individuals and small teams
Visit
Overview
Description

Cloudreve is an open‑source, self‑hosted file management platform that lets you create your own private cloud. It provides a web interface for uploading, organizing, and sharing files securely without relying on third‑party services. Designed for individuals and small teams, Cloudreve supports multiple storage back‑ends, user authentication, and fine‑grained permission controls, making it a flexible alternative to commercial cloud providers.

Filebrowser is an open‑source, web‑based file manager that you can run on any server. It provides a clean UI for browsing, uploading, and sharing files without needing a desktop client. Designed for simplicity, it lets users manage directories, set permissions, and generate shareable links directly from the browser, making collaboration easy for small groups.

Pricing
Free
Free
Category
Cloud Storage
File Managers
Best for
Individuals and small teams
Individuals and small teams
Specifications
Spec source
AI-estimated
AI-estimated
deployment
Self-hosted
Self-hosted
open source
Yes
Yes
github stars
28,422
35,684+26%
api available
Yes
Yes
support options
GitHub Issues, Community Forum
Community support
primary language
Go
Go
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • Free and open‑source
  • Self‑hosted gives full data control
  • Supports many storage back‑ends
  • Rich permission and sharing options
  • Fully open‑source and free to use
  • Easy to self‑host with Docker or binary
  • Simple UI suitable for non‑technical users
  • Fine‑grained permission controls
Cons
  • Requires own server or VPS to run
  • Limited official documentation compared to commercial products
  • No built‑in mobile apps, only web access
  • Limited advanced collaboration features compared to SaaS solutions
  • No built‑in real‑time editing of documents
  • Community support only, no guaranteed SLA
Community & Metrics
Upvotes
0
0
User rating
Not enough data
Not enough data

More alternatives & similar tools

Alternatives to cloudreve

View all →
filebrowser
filebrowser

Self‑hosted web file manager for individuals and small teams

Compare
CasaOS
CasaOS

Simple home server OS built on Docker

Compare
Zerobyte
Zerobyte

Automated backup solution for self-hosters

Compare
Firecracker
Firecracker

Secure and fast microVMs for serverless computing

Compare

Alternatives to filebrowser

View all →
cloudreve
cloudreve

Self‑hosted cloud storage for individuals and small teams

Compare

The Verdict

AI-generated from listing data

Both Cloudreve and Filebrowser are free, open‑source, self‑hosted file managers; Cloudreve wins on storage‑backend flexibility, while Filebrowser offers a simpler deployment and UI.

Key differences

  • •Storage back‑ends: Cloudreve supports local disk, S3‑compatible services, and FTP; Filebrowser only mentions local disk.
  • •Media previews: Cloudreve automatically creates image thumbnails and video previews; Filebrowser does not list this capability.
  • •Deployment simplicity: Filebrowser can run as a single binary or Docker container; Cloudreve requires a Go‑based server setup without a single‑binary claim.
  • •Theming: Filebrowser includes built‑in theming and custom CSS; Cloudreve does not mention UI theming.
  • •Support channels: Cloudreve lists GitHub Issues and a Community Forum; Filebrowser lists only community support.
DimensionWinner

Pricing & value

Both are free and open‑source, offering comparable cost‑free value.

Tie

Ease of use / learning curve

Filebrowser’s single‑binary/Docker deployment and simple UI lower setup and learning effort.

filebrowser

Features & depth

Cloudreve adds multi‑backend storage, thumbnails, video previews, and per‑folder permissions beyond Filebrowser’s core features.

cloudreve

Integrations & ecosystem

Cloudreve provides WebDAV and broader storage‑backend support; Filebrowser only mentions a REST API.

cloudreve

Collaboration

Cloudreve’s shareable links with password protection, expiration, and granular permissions support richer collaboration.

cloudreve

Scalability

Support for S3‑compatible services lets Cloudreve scale storage independently of the host server.

cloudreve

Support

Cloudreve offers both GitHub Issues and a Community Forum, giving more structured community assistance than Filebrowser’s single channel.

cloudreve

Security & privacy

Both are self‑hosted with no built‑in SaaS exposure; shareable link controls are comparable.

Tie

Migration / lock‑in

Both store data on user‑controlled back‑ends; no vendor lock‑in is indicated.

Tie

Choose cloudreve if…

Teams needing multi‑backend storage, media previews, or advanced sharing controls.

Choose filebrowser if…

Users prioritizing quick, easy deployment and a straightforward UI.

Common questions

Is there any cost to use either product?

Both Cloudreve and Filebrowser are free and open‑source.

Which tool is easier to install on a new server?

Filebrowser can be run as a single binary or Docker container, making installation simpler than Cloudreve’s Go‑based server setup.

Can I store files on Amazon S3 with these tools?

Only Cloudreve explicitly supports S3‑compatible storage back‑ends.