cloudreve vs Box
Side-by-side comparison of features, pricing, ratings, and alternatives.
Cloudreve is an open‑source, self‑hosted file management platform that lets you create your own private cloud. It provides a web interface for uploading, organizing, and sharing files securely without relying on third‑party services. Designed for individuals and small teams, Cloudreve supports multiple storage back‑ends, user authentication, and fine‑grained permission controls, making it a flexible alternative to commercial cloud providers.
Box is a cloud content-management platform focused on enterprise security, compliance, and workflow, rather than just consumer file sync. It emphasizes governance, permissions, and integrations for business.
Free personal tier; business plans from about $15/user/month.
- Free and open‑source
- Self‑hosted gives full data control
- Supports many storage back‑ends
- Rich permission and sharing options
- Strong enterprise security
- Good governance and compliance
- Wide integrations
- Workflow automation
- Requires own server or VPS to run
- Limited official documentation compared to commercial products
- No built‑in mobile apps, only web access
- Overkill for individuals
- Pricier than consumer options
- Interface less consumer-polished
What reviewers say
cloudreve Reviews
No reviews yet.
Box Reviews
4.0 (3)Decent with caveats
Tried Box recently. Upside: workflow automation. Downside: overkill for individuals.
Great cloud-storage
We rolled out Box last quarter. Strong enterprise security. Minor gripe: overkill for individuals. Would recommend.
Great cloud-storage
Tried Box recently. Workflow automation. No real complaints. Would recommend.
More alternatives & similar tools
Alternatives to cloudreve
View all →
Alternatives to Box
View all →
The Verdict
AI-generated from listing dataCloudreve is a free, self‑hosted solution giving full data control but requiring your own server; Box offers managed, enterprise‑grade features at a cost, trading control for convenience and compliance.
Key differences
- •Self‑hosting vs. SaaS: Cloudreve runs on your own server, Box is a cloud service.
- •Cost model: Cloudreve is free open‑source; Box charges per user after a limited free tier.
- •Enterprise features: Box provides built‑in compliance, workflow automation, and mobile apps; Cloudreve lacks these.
- •Permission granularity: Cloudreve offers per‑user/folder rights; Box adds broader governance controls.
- •Support: Cloudreve relies on community/GitHub; Box offers commercial support options.
Pricing & value
Cloudreve is free open‑source; Box costs $15+/user month after free tier.
Ease of use / learning curve
Box provides polished native apps and SaaS UI; Cloudreve only web dashboard, no mobile apps.
Features & depth
Box includes enterprise security, compliance, workflow automation; Cloudreve offers basic sharing and API only.
Integrations & ecosystem
Box has broad app integrations and SDKs; Cloudreve limited to REST/WebDAV.
Collaboration
Box built for team collaboration with governance; Cloudreve targets individuals/small teams, limited collaboration tools.
Scalability
Box scales automatically as SaaS; Cloudreve scalability depends on your own infrastructure.
Support
Box offers commercial support; Cloudreve only community GitHub issues and forum.
Security & privacy
Cloudreve keeps data on your own server; Box stores data in its cloud, subject to provider policies.
Migration / lock‑in
Cloudreve data stays on your storage back‑ends; Box may involve vendor lock‑in and migration effort.
Choose cloudreve if…
Individuals or small teams who want zero cost, full data control, and can manage their own server.
Choose Box if…
Enterprises or regulated organizations needing built‑in compliance, support, and ready‑to‑use collaboration tools.
Common questions
Is there any cost to use Cloudreve?
No, Cloudreve is free and open‑source.
Does Box provide mobile access?
Yes, Box offers native iOS and Android apps.
Can I run Cloudreve on my existing storage like S3?
Yes, it supports local disk, S3‑compatible services, and FTP as back‑ends.