Learn how Kestra and n8n differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these workflow orchestration tools is best for you.
Last 30 days
Last commit
Repository age
Version
License
Self-hosted
Repository

Last 30 days
Last commit
Repository age
Version
Self-hosted
Repository

Both Kestra and n8n have their unique strengths and serve similar purposes effectively. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
n8n significantly outpaces Kestra in community adoption with 201,192 stars compared to 27,853 stars on GitHub. This 7.2x difference suggests n8n has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, n8n has 60,227 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
n8n is growing faster, adding 3,998 stars in the last 30 days (+2%) against adding 449 stars for Kestra (+1.6%). n8n is both larger and pulling further ahead.
Both projects show recent activity, with Kestra last updated 7 hours ago and n8n 7 hours ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, Bash, Typescript, SCSS, Vue. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Kestra uses JSX, Python, Java while n8n leverages CSS.
Both projects started around the same time, with Kestra beginning 7 years ago and n8n 7 years ago.
Kestra is licensed under Apache-2.0, while n8n's license terms are not publicly specified.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Workflow Orchestration. However, they also have distinct specializations: Kestra also focuses on ETL & Data Integration while n8n extends into Low-Code/No-Code, Workflow Automation.
Both Kestra and n8n offer self-hosting capabilities, giving you full control over your data and infrastructure.