Traefik vs Tsuru
| Tagline | Cloud-native HTTP reverse proxy and load balancer for microservices | Extensible open-source PaaS built by Globo for multi-tenant app deployment |
| Category | Self-Hosting Platforms & PaaS | Self-Hosting Platforms & PaaS |
| Replaces | Heroku, Vercel, Render | Heroku, Render, Netlify |
| GitHub stars | 64k | 4.5k |
| Language | Go | Go |
| License | MIT | BSD-3-Clause |
| Self-host difficulty | 3/5 Moderate | 4/5 Involved |
| Deploy options | Docker Docker Compose Kubernetes Manual | Docker Kubernetes Manual |
| Managed hosting | ||
| Last updated | 5 days ago | 4 months 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.
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
Tsuru
- Documentation is sparse for newcomers outside the Globo ecosystem
- UI dashboard is minimal; most operations require the CLI
- Community support is smaller than Dokku or CapRover
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.