Sandstorm vs Traefik
| Tagline | Personal server platform for running self-hosted web apps with strong sandboxing | Cloud-native HTTP reverse proxy and load balancer for microservices |
| Category | Self-Hosting Platforms & PaaS | Self-Hosting Platforms & PaaS |
| Replaces | Heroku, Render, Netlify | Heroku, Vercel, Render |
| GitHub stars | 7k | 64k |
| Language | C++ | Go |
| License | Apache-2.0 | MIT |
| Self-host difficulty | 4/5 Involved | 3/5 Moderate |
| Deploy options | Manual | Docker Docker Compose Kubernetes Manual |
| Managed hosting | ||
| Last updated | yesterday | today |
| View repo | View repo |
Where each falls short
The honest trade-offs — what you give up with each, versus the proprietary tools they replace.
Sandstorm
- App ecosystem is very small; most popular self-hosted apps are not packaged for Sandstorm
- Project has limited active development; community and update cadence have slowed significantly
- No Docker support; apps must be specially packaged in Sandstorm's proprietary SPK format
- No horizontal scaling, load balancing, or modern cloud-native deployment patterns
Traefik
- Ingress/routing layer only; does not provide git-based deployments, build systems, or app management
- Configuration via labels and providers has a steep learning curve compared to Heroku's zero-config UX
- No built-in secrets management or environment variable injection for deployed apps
- Enterprise features (clustering, advanced WAF, SSO) require the commercial Traefik Enterprise edition
Bottom line
Choose Traefik if you want the lower-effort setup; choose Traefik for the larger community and ecosystem. Traefik has seen more recent development. Open each guide below for deploy steps and the full feature gap.
Sandstorm
Personal server platform for running self-hosted web apps with strong sandboxing