Learn how Kestra and Windmill 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.

Kestra appears to have several advantages over Windmill, particularly in popularity, maturity and licensing. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Kestra leads in popularity with 27,469 stars vs 17,298 stars for Windmill. The 59% higher star count indicates stronger community adoption. In terms of developer contributions, Kestra has 2,766 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
Both projects show recent activity, with Kestra last updated 20 hours ago and Windmill 14 hours ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, Bash, Typescript, Python. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Kestra uses JSX, SCSS, Vue, Java while Windmill leverages CSS, Golang, Rust, C, Objective-C, SvelteKit.
Kestra has been in development longer, starting 7 years ago, compared to Windmill which began 4 years ago. This 2.7-year head start suggests Kestra may have more mature features and established processes.
Kestra is licensed under Apache-2.0, while Windmill'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 Windmill extends into PaaS & Deployment Tools, Workflow Automation.
Both Kestra and Windmill offer self-hosting capabilities, giving you full control over your data and infrastructure.

vs
Activity score
Stars
Forks
Last commit
Repository age
Version
License
Self-hosted
Repository
Activity score
Stars
Forks
Last commit
Repository age
Version
Self-hosted
Repository