Rocket.Chat vs Stalwart XMPP
| Tagline | Fully customizable open-source communications platform and Slack alternative | Modern all-in-one XMPP server with web admin panel written in Rust |
| Category | Team Chat & Collaboration | Team Chat & Collaboration |
| Replaces | Slack, Microsoft Teams, Discord | Slack, Microsoft Teams |
| GitHub stars | 46k | 800 |
| Language | TypeScript | Rust |
| License | MIT | AGPL-3.0 |
| Self-host difficulty | 3/5 Moderate | 2/5 Easy |
| Deploy options | One-Click Docker Docker Compose Kubernetes Manual | Docker Manual |
| Managed hosting | ||
| Last updated | 5 days ago | 1 month 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.
Rocket.Chat
- Resource-heavy (Node.js + MongoDB) and can be slow at scale on modest hardware
- Some enterprise features (engagement dashboard, scalability, advanced auth) require a paid plan
- UI can feel cluttered compared to Slack
- Mobile apps have historically lagged the web client in polish
Stalwart XMPP
- Younger project with a smaller community and less battle-tested than Prosody or Ejabberd
- No native web chat client included; users need a third-party XMPP app
- Clustering and high-availability support is still maturing
Bottom line
Choose Stalwart XMPP if you want the lower-effort setup; choose Rocket.Chat for the larger community and ecosystem. Rocket.Chat has seen more recent development. Open each guide below for deploy steps and the full feature gap.
Rocket.Chat
Fully customizable open-source communications platform and Slack alternative