1Panel vs BunkerWeb
| Tagline | Modern Linux server and web-app management panel with app store deploys | Next-generation open-source Web Application Firewall for protecting web services |
| Category | Self-Hosting Platforms & PaaS | Self-Hosting Platforms & PaaS |
| Replaces | Heroku, Render | Heroku, Netlify, Render |
| GitHub stars | 36k | 11k |
| Language | Go | deb |
| License | GPL-3.0 | AGPL-3.0 |
| Self-host difficulty | 2/5 Easy | 3/5 Moderate |
| Deploy options | Docker Manual | Docker Docker Compose Manual |
| Managed hosting | ||
| Last updated | today | today |
| View repo | View repo |
Where each falls short
The honest trade-offs — what you give up with each, versus the proprietary tools they replace.
1Panel
- More of a server/hosting control panel than a git-push PaaS; no native buildpack or git-deploy pipeline.
- No horizontal autoscaling or clustering across nodes.
- Documentation and community are strongest in Chinese; English resources lag.
- No managed cloud option or edge/CDN.
BunkerWeb
- WAF/security-focused; lacks any application deployment or build pipeline capabilities
- No global CDN or edge network; all traffic routes through self-hosted nodes
- Advanced bot management and behavioral analytics are less mature than commercial WAFs
- Multi-node clustering and high-availability configurations require significant manual setup
Bottom line
Choose 1Panel if you want the lower-effort setup; choose 1Panel for the larger community and ecosystem. Open each guide below for deploy steps and the full feature gap.
BunkerWeb
Next-generation open-source Web Application Firewall for protecting web services