Caddy vs Cosmos
| Tagline | Automatic HTTPS web server and reverse proxy with zero config TLS | Secure self-hosting gateway and server manager with built-in privacy features |
| Category | Self-Hosting Platforms & PaaS | Self-Hosting Platforms & PaaS |
| Replaces | Heroku, Netlify, Render | Heroku, Render, Netlify |
| GitHub stars | 73k | 6k |
| Language | Go | Docker |
| License | Apache-2.0 | Apache-2.0 |
| Self-host difficulty | 3/5 Moderate | 2/5 Easy |
| Deploy options | Docker Docker Compose Manual | Docker Docker Compose |
| Managed hosting | ||
| Last updated | today | 23 days ago |
| View repo | View repo |
Where each falls short
The honest trade-offs — what you give up with each, versus the proprietary tools they replace.
Caddy
- Not a full PaaS; no git push deploy, build pipelines, or app lifecycle management
- No built-in CI/CD integration; needs to be combined with other tools for deployments
- Dashboard and metrics require third-party tools (Prometheus, Grafana) — none built-in
- No managed database provisioning or environment variable secrets management
Cosmos
- No Git-based or CI/CD deployment pipeline for custom code
- App marketplace is smaller and less mature than CasaOS or Umbrel
- Multi-server and horizontal scaling are not supported
- Documentation and community support are limited compared to more established platforms
Bottom line
Choose Cosmos if you want the lower-effort setup; choose Caddy for the larger community and ecosystem. Caddy has seen more recent development. Open each guide below for deploy steps and the full feature gap.
Cosmos
Secure self-hosting gateway and server manager with built-in privacy features