ejabberd vs Openfire

Both are self-hosted communication - xmpp - servers projects. This page compares how well each one is actually maintained — the part you cannot see from a feature list.

Openfire scores 80 against ejabberd's 75, putting it slightly ahead on the strength of a stronger recent trend. That measures project health, not feature fit — ejabberd may still be the right choice if it does what you need.

	ejabberd	Openfire
Health score	75/100	80/100
Commits (11 mo)	597	918
Commits (last 3 mo)	121	356
Stars	6.7k	3.1k
Latest release	30 Jul 2026	17 Aug 2026
Licence	GPL-2.0	Apache-2.0
Built with	Erlang, Docker	Java
Typical RAM	2 GB	2 GB

ejabberd

XMPP instant messaging server.

75/100

Healthy

Actively maintained with regular releases.

Maintenance 27/40

Releases 25/25

Community 14/20

Momentum 8/15

Commit activity more than 68% of tracked projects; popularity more than 72%. How this is calculated.

Commits, last 11 months

Openfire

Real time collaboration (RTC) server.

80/100

Healthy

Actively maintained with regular releases.

Maintenance 31/40

Releases 25/25

Community 12/20

Momentum 12/15

Commit activity more than 78% of tracked projects; popularity more than 58%. How this is calculated.

Commits, last 11 months

How to read this

Everything above is measured, not opinion: commit counts and release dates come from the public repositories, and the health score ranks each project against all 1352 projects we track. Read the full method.

What this comparison deliberately does not do is tell you which has the better feature set. Maintenance health tells you which project will still be receiving security fixes in two years. Decide that first, then compare features on the projects that survive the filter.

See every option in this category: self-hosted communication - xmpp - servers.