Both Kopia and Restic handle encrypted, deduplicated backups — but they take different approaches to UI, performance, and automation. Here's how to pick.
Quick Verdict
Kopia is the better choice for most self-hosters because it includes a web UI, faster snapshot creation, and more granular retention policies out of the box. Restic has a larger community and more third-party integrations, but requires CLI-only operation unless you add Borgmatic or another wrapper.
Overview
Both Kopia and Restic are modern, encrypted, deduplicated backup tools that compete directly with each other. Restic has been around since 2015 and has a mature ecosystem. Kopia launched in 2019 and has been rapidly gaining ground with features like a built-in web UI, better compression options, and server mode for multi-machine backups.
Both tools encrypt and deduplicate your data by default, and both support a wide range of storage backends including S3, SFTP, Backblaze B2, and local storage.
Feature Comparison
| Feature | Kopia | Restic |
|---|---|---|
| Encryption | AES-256-GCM (default) | AES-256 in CTR mode |
| Deduplication | Content-defined chunking | Content-defined chunking |
| Compression | zstd, gzip, pgzip, s2, lz4 (configurable per policy) | zstd, gzip (added in 0.16) |
| Web UI | Built-in web dashboard | None (CLI only) |
| Server mode | Yes — Kopia server for centralized backups | Restic REST server (separate project) |
| Retention policies | Fine-grained (keep latest N, hourly, daily, weekly, monthly, yearly) | Similar (keep-within, keep-last, keep-hourly, etc.) |
| Snapshot browsing | Mount + web UI file browser | Mount via FUSE |
| Storage backends | Local, S3, B2, Azure, GCS, SFTP, Rclone, WebDAV | Local, S3, B2, Azure, GCS, SFTP, REST server |
| Cross-platform | Windows, macOS, Linux | Windows, macOS, Linux, FreeBSD |
| Docker support | Official image (kopia/kopia) |
Community images only |
| Repository format | Proprietary | Proprietary (well-documented) |
| License | Apache 2.0 | BSD 2-Clause |
Installation Complexity
Kopia provides an official Docker image and can run as both a CLI tool and a web server. The Docker setup is straightforward — mount your data, point it at a repository, and the web UI handles the rest.
Restic is distributed as a single binary with no official Docker image. Docker deployment requires community images or custom Dockerfiles. For scheduling and automation, most people pair Restic with Borgmatic, cron, or a systemd timer.
Kopia wins on installation simplicity, especially for users who want a visual interface.
Performance and Resource Usage
| Metric | Kopia | Restic |
|---|---|---|
| RAM usage (idle) | ~50-100 MB | ~30-50 MB |
| RAM usage (large backup) | 200-500 MB | 200-800 MB |
| Initial backup speed | Fast (parallel uploads, zstd compression) | Moderate (sequential by default) |
| Incremental backup speed | Very fast (efficient change detection) | Fast |
| Restore speed | Fast | Fast |
| CPU during backup | Moderate (compression + encryption) | Lower (less compression by default) |
Kopia is generally faster for initial backups due to parallel uploads and its default zstd compression. Restic has improved significantly since adding zstd compression in version 0.16, but Kopia still tends to be faster in benchmarks.
For incremental backups, both are fast — they only transfer changed data blocks.
Community and Support
| Metric | Kopia | Restic |
|---|---|---|
| GitHub stars | ~9K | ~28K |
| First release | 2019 | 2015 |
| Documentation quality | Good, growing | Excellent, mature |
| Third-party integrations | Growing | Extensive (Borgmatic, Autorestic, resticprofile) |
| Active development | Very active | Active |
Restic has a significantly larger community, more tutorials online, and more third-party tooling. If you search for "how to backup Docker volumes," you'll find ten Restic guides for every Kopia guide.
Kopia's community is smaller but growing fast. The project's development velocity is high — new features land frequently.
Use Cases
Choose Kopia If...
- You want a web UI for managing backups without touching the CLI
- You're backing up multiple machines and want centralized management (Kopia server mode)
- You want fine-grained compression settings (different compression per path)
- You want built-in scheduling without cron or systemd
- You prefer a more modern, batteries-included tool
Choose Restic If...
- You want the largest community and most third-party tooling
- You're already using Borgmatic and want to keep that workflow
- You want the most battle-tested option with the longest track record
- You need FreeBSD support
- You prefer a Unix-philosophy "do one thing well" approach and are comfortable with CLI
Final Verdict
Kopia is the better choice for most self-hosters in 2026. The built-in web UI, faster performance, better compression options, and server mode make it the more complete solution. It's what Restic would be if it had started with a web interface in mind.
Restic is still excellent and has a massive head start in community size and documentation. If you're already using Restic and happy with it, there's no urgent reason to switch. But for new setups, Kopia offers more out of the box with less configuration.
For a GUI-less, automation-focused approach, pairing Restic with Borgmatic closes the gap significantly.
Top comments (0)