Passbolt vs Vaultwarden
| Tagline | Open-source password manager for teams with granular sharing and PGP encryption | Lightweight Bitwarden-compatible server written in Rust, perfect for self-hosting |
| Category | Password Managers & Secrets | Password Managers & Secrets |
| Replaces | 1Password, LastPass, Dashlane | 1Password, LastPass, Dashlane |
| GitHub stars | 6.1k | 67k |
| Language | PHP | Rust |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | AGPL-3.0 |
| Self-host difficulty | 3/5 Moderate | 2/5 Easy |
| Deploy options | Docker Docker Compose Kubernetes Manual | Docker Docker Compose Kubernetes Manual |
| Managed hosting | ||
| Last updated | 4 days ago | 2 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.
Passbolt
- Several features (SSO, directory sync, MFA policies, tags) are gated behind paid Pro/Cloud editions
- Relies on browser extensions; mobile app maturity lags 1Password/Dashlane
- Initial setup (GPG server keys, SMTP, HTTPS) is fiddly compared to consumer apps
- No personal/consumer focus — geared toward team credential sharing
Vaultwarden
- Unofficial reimplementation; not supported or endorsed by Bitwarden, so API changes can break compatibility
- No official mobile/desktop apps of its own; depends entirely on Bitwarden's clients
- Some enterprise/SSO and event-logging features of paid Bitwarden are absent or only partially implemented
- You own all security hardening, backups, and TLS termination yourself
Bottom line
Choose Vaultwarden if you want the lower-effort setup; choose Vaultwarden for the larger community and ecosystem. Vaultwarden has seen more recent development. Open each guide below for deploy steps and the full feature gap.
Passbolt
Open-source password manager for teams with granular sharing and PGP encryption
Vaultwarden
Lightweight Bitwarden-compatible server written in Rust, perfect for self-hosting