GLPI vs Zammad
| Tagline | Full-featured open-source IT asset management and service desk with ITIL support | Web-based open-source helpdesk and customer support ticketing system |
| Category | Helpdesk & Support | Helpdesk & Support |
| Replaces | Zendesk, Freshdesk, Intercom | Zendesk, Freshdesk |
| GitHub stars | 4.2k | 5.7k |
| Language | PHP | Ruby |
| License | GPL-3.0 | AGPL-3.0 |
| Self-host difficulty | 3/5 Moderate | 4/5 Involved |
| Deploy options | Docker Docker Compose Manual | Docker Compose Kubernetes Manual |
| Managed hosting | ||
| Last updated | 1 month ago | 5 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.
GLPI
- UI is complex and can overwhelm users who only need basic ticketing
- Asset management and ITSM workflows require significant initial configuration
- Plugin quality varies widely; some community plugins are unmaintained
Zammad
- Resource-heavy: needs Elasticsearch plus a database, making setup and ops more demanding
- UI feels dated compared to Zendesk/Intercom
- No native modern live-chat widget on par with Intercom
- Smaller marketplace/integration ecosystem than the incumbents
Bottom line
Choose GLPI if you want the lower-effort setup; choose Zammad for the larger community and ecosystem. Zammad has seen more recent development. Open each guide below for deploy steps and the full feature gap.
GLPI
Full-featured open-source IT asset management and service desk with ITIL support