Rocket.Chat vs Stoat
| Tagline | Fully customizable open-source communications platform and Slack alternative | User-first self-hosted team chat platform built with Rust |
| Category | Team Chat & Collaboration | Team Chat & Collaboration |
| Replaces | Slack, Microsoft Teams | Slack, Discord, Microsoft Teams |
| GitHub stars | 46k | 2.5k |
| Language | TypeScript | Rust |
| License | MIT | AGPL-3.0 |
| Self-host difficulty | 3/5 Moderate | 3/5 Moderate |
| Deploy options | One-Click Docker Docker Compose Kubernetes Manual | Docker Docker Compose Manual |
| Managed hosting | ||
| Last updated | today | 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
Stoat
- Relatively new project; ecosystem of integrations and bots is minimal compared to Slack
- No voice or video calling built in
- Mobile apps not yet as mature as established competitors
- Plugin/app marketplace does not exist yet
Bottom line
Both are a similar lift to self-host; 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