copyparty vs psitransfer

Self-hosted file sharing and transfer projects compared

copyparty serves local folders for browsing and transfers through a browser and multiple network protocols. psitransfer focuses on straightforward file handoffs with resumable transfers, expiring buckets, and one-time downloads.

copypartypsitransfer
LanguagePythonJavaScript
LicenseMITBSD-2-Clause
Stars46.9k2k
Forks1.9k246
Last analyzedOct 3, 2026Oct 7, 2026

Key differences

  • copyparty combines file browsing and sharing with configurable accounts, folder permissions, search, and media tools; psitransfer centers on upload buckets and download links.
  • copyparty supports HTTP(S), WebDAV, SFTP, FTP(S), TFTP, and SMB/CIFS; psitransfer offers browser-based sharing and tus.io resumable transfers.
  • copyparty is written in Python and licensed under MIT; psitransfer is written in JavaScript and licensed under BSD-2-Clause.
  • copyparty can serve ongoing folder access with per-folder permissions; psitransfer supports expiring buckets and one-time downloads for temporary handoffs.
  • copyparty has 46.9k stars and 1.9k forks, while psitransfer has 2k stars and 246 forks.

Choose copyparty if you…

  • need to browse and serve local folders over multiple network protocols.
  • want configurable accounts, per-folder permissions, search, or browser media tools.
  • need a portable file server for ongoing or temporary use.
Read the copyparty analysis →

Choose psitransfer if you…

  • want a focused service for file handoffs without requiring recipients to create accounts.
  • need resumable uploads and downloads, expiring buckets, or one-time downloads.
  • want to offer ZIP or tar.gz downloads of a bucket’s files.
Read the psitransfer analysis →

Compare the numbers side by side, or add more projects

This comparison is generated with AI from the OSRepos analyses of both projects. Always check each project's repository and documentation before choosing.