The best Dify alternatives, compared honestly
Dify is a genuinely good product: a visual workflow editor, an agent runtime and a knowledge base in one Docker command, 153,094 GitHub stars as of 2026-08-21, and release 1.16.1 on 2026-07-28 in a roughly monthly cadence. What sends teams looking is the licence. Dify's LICENSE file is "a modified version of the Apache License 2.0" that, unless Dify authorises it in writing, forbids using the source "to operate a multi-tenant environment", and it defines one tenant as one workspace: the same unit Dify Cloud bills at $59 per workspace per month and never grants twice at any self-serve price. This page compares seven alternatives by exact licence, by what free self-hosting actually forbids, and by published price with its billing cycle.
The best Dify alternative depends on which half of Dify you need:
- The same visual builder, under a licence with no extra conditions → Langflow: MIT, one LICENSE file, zero enterprise-marked paths out of 11,642.
- Canvas plus knowledge bases, plus a hosted option → Sim: unmodified Apache-2.0, hosted Pro at $25 per user per month billed monthly.
- Several teams or customers kept apart → that is multi-tenancy as Dify's licence defines it, so price an Enterprise contract (no published figure) or choose a tool that permits it.
- Only chat over your own documents → Open WebUI: free to self-host, with a branding clause that binds above 50 end users in a rolling 30 days.
Why teams look elsewhere
What pushes teams off Dify
Dify did not get worse at its core job: 1.16.1 shipped on 2026-07-28 and the repository was pushed to on 2026-08-21. Six patterns recur in Dify's own issue tracker, and five of them are about the licence and the workspace rather than the product.
The workspace is the unit in both places
On Cloud, Dify bills per workspace: $59 per workspace per month on Professional, $159 per workspace per month on Team. Self-hosted, a second workspace is exactly what the licence calls multi-tenant. One concept, two different kinds of bill.
The licence defines a tenant as a workspace
The LICENSE file says that, unless Dify authorises it in writing, you "may not use the Dify source code to operate a multi-tenant environment", then defines the term: "one tenant corresponds to one workspace". That turns an internal split between two departments into a licensing question rather than a configuration one.
Branding is a licence clause and a paid row
You "may not remove or modify the LOGO or copyright information in the Dify console or applications", scoped to everything in the web/ directory. The pricing page then lists "WebApp Branding Customization" as Enterprise-only. The restriction and the upsell are the same item.
No second workspace at any self-serve price
All three published Cloud tiers list "1 Team Workspace". Free gives 1 team member; Professional gives 3 for $590 per workspace per year; Team gives 50 for $1,590 per workspace per year. Multiple workspaces live on Enterprise, which has no published price.
The clause got broader once, and may again
On 2024-09-09, pull request #8143 changed "Multi-tenant SaaS service" to "Multi-tenant service", dropping the SaaS qualifier. Clause 2a of the same file reserves the right to "adjust the open-source agreement to be more strict or relaxed as deemed necessary".
Self-hosting is a hundred-variable job
Issue #33051, opened 2026-03-05, is titled "Self-hosted deployment is too complex" and reports that "Users must manually copy .env.example to .env and then edit 100+ variables", with "No automatic secret generation". It was closed as not planned.
The shortlist
7 Dify alternatives worth evaluating
Dify bundles three separable jobs: a visual builder, an agent and workflow runtime, and retrieval over your own documents. Almost nothing replaces all three, so this ranking optimises for a licence you can rely on plus the closest honest fit for the job you actually need. Each pick lists one real strength and one real weakness.
MIT, one LICENSE file, and zero enterprise-marked paths out of 11,642; a visual flow builder with 153,524 stars and weekly releases (v1.11.4 on 2026-08-19). Weakness: there is no hosted product at all, since langflow.org/pricing returns HTTP 404 and the only SKU is IBM Elite Support at no published price, and Langflow's own security docs say it "neither enforces isolation between users within a single Langflow process" and that its code editor executes arbitrary Python "with full access to the host Langflow backend process, filesystem, and network".
Unmodified Apache-2.0 with no enterprise directory, and the closest shape to Dify: canvas, knowledge bases, publishing, plus a hosted tier at $25 per user per month billed monthly on Pro (annual takes 15% off) and $100 per user per month on Max. Weakness: the youngest and smallest project here at 29,448 stars, and its own two sources disagree about the free tier, with the pricing page listing "Monthly credits 1,000" while the docs say 1,000 one-time; hosted runs bill 1 credit ($0.005) per run plus model cost multiplied by 200.
Real MIT with no enterprise carve-out anywhere in the tree, 57,404 stars, release 1.15.17 on 2026-08-20. Weakness: it is code-first Python with no canvas, so it replaces Dify's runtime and not its builder; the free managed tier stops hard at 50 workflow executions per month with no overage, and the only tier above it is "Custom" with no published price, no rate and no stated minimum.
Free to self-host, 149,431 stars, v0.11.0 on 2026-07-27, and it covers the retrieval-and-chat half of Dify well. Weakness: it is a chat front end and model gateway, not a workflow builder, and its licence is BSD-3 plus a fourth clause requiring the branding to stay unless your end users do "not exceed fifty (50) within any rolling thirty (30) day period"; that clause landed on 2025-04-18 and first shipped in v0.6.6 on 2025-05-05, and both openwebui.com/pricing and /enterprise return HTTP 404, so there is no published price at all.
The largest project in the comparison at 201,445 stars, with the widest connector library and free self-hosting for unlimited users. Weakness: the licence is the Sustainable Use License, and n8n's own docs say "we do not call ourselves open source"; the free edition excludes sharing of workflows and credentials, so only the instance owner and the user who created them can open them, and SSO first appears on the self-hosted Business tier at 8,000 EUR per year billed annually, or 800 EUR per month.
The framework is MIT across 831 paths with no enterprise-marked files, 40,143 stars, core 1.2.11 on 2026-08-11, and it is the most precise control flow here. Weakness: the server you would actually deploy, langgraph-api, is under Elastic License 2.0, which says you "may not provide the software to third parties as a hosted or managed service"; self-hosting is sold as an add-on to the Enterprise plan, the runtime reports to beacon.langchain.com for licence verification unless you buy an offline (air-gapped) licence, and the product has been renamed around its users, with LangGraph Platform now marketed as LangSmith Deployment.
Unlimited executions on a free tier, an AGPL-3.0 backend, and v1.793.0 on 2026-08-20. Weakness: the AGPL covers the backend "except any snippets of code under the compile flag 'enterprise'", and the Community image Windmill publishes "also includes proprietary and non-public code and features which are not open source", so the build you would run is not open source and Windmill's own plan table reads "Commercial licence: No" on Free; it also has no knowledge base and no vector store, so it does not do Dify's retrieval half at all.
Four candidates were considered and left off with reasons: Kestra is YAML-first rather than a canvas and keeps custom apps Enterprise-only; Chainlit sits at a different layer and its team stepped back on 2025-05-01; Rivet's last release was app-v1.11.3 on 2025-08-08; AutoGen is in maintenance mode, superseded by Microsoft Agent Framework, with its last release on 2025-09-30. Flowise is absent because it is gone: Workday acquired it on 2025-08-14, the final release flowise@3.1.4 shipped on 2026-07-29, the repository was archived in mid-August 2026 (the sunset page says 10 August, the closing announcement says 13 August) and end of life is 2026-08-31.
Side by side
Dify alternatives compared
Prices as of August 2026, from each vendor's own pricing page. The column that decides most of these migrations is not price but "exact licence", because it is the only one that tells you whether a second workspace, a removed logo or a hosted offering is a configuration change or a contract. Dify's own row is included as the baseline.
| Tool | Type | Exact licence | OSI-approved? | What free self-hosting forbids or caps | Published price, with cycle |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dify | Visual LLM app platform | Modified Apache 2.0, plus two restrictions and a clause letting Dify tighten the terms | ✗ No: the licence is "a modified version of the Apache License 2.0"; no such licence is on the SPDX/OSI list | Operating a multi-tenant environment without written authorisation, where one tenant is one workspace; removing the console logo | $59 per workspace/month or $590 per workspace/year; Team $159 per workspace/month or $1,590 per workspace/year; Enterprise not published |
| Langflow | Visual flow builder | MIT | ✓ Yes | Nothing; it also provides no isolation between tenants, by its own docs | No hosted product; IBM Elite Support not published |
| Sim | Visual agent builder | Apache-2.0, unmodified | ✓ Yes | Nothing self-hosted; the free hosted tier is 1 workspace with no teammate invites | Pro $25 per user/month billed monthly; Max $100 per user/month; Enterprise not published |
| CrewAI | Code-first agent framework | MIT | ✓ Yes | Nothing self-hosted; the free hosted tier stops at 50 executions/month | Basic "Free", no cycle published; Enterprise "Custom", not published |
| Open WebUI | Chat front end with retrieval | BSD-3 plus a branding clause | ✗ No, since clause 4 was added | Removing the branding once end users exceed 50 in a rolling 30 days | Not published: pricing and enterprise pages both HTTP 404 |
| n8n | Workflow automation | Sustainable Use License, with n8n Enterprise on 196 .ee. paths |
✗ No, by n8n's own docs | Sharing workflows and credentials, SSO, projects, environments, git version control, log streaming | Starter 20 EUR/month billed annually; self-hosted Business 667 EUR/month billed annually, or 8,000 EUR/year |
| LangGraph | Agent graph framework plus server | MIT framework; Elastic License 2.0 server | Partly: framework yes, server no | Providing the server as a hosted or managed service; self-hosting requires Enterprise | Developer $0 per seat/month; Plus $39 per seat/month; Enterprise not published |
| Windmill | Script and workflow platform | AGPL-3.0 except code under the "enterprise" compile flag | Partly: the published Community image is not | 3 workspaces, 50 users with only 10 on SSO, 30-day retention, no commercial licence on Free | Enterprise from $120/month; $20/month per developer seat; $50/month per 2 GB worker (one compute unit) |
Seven of the eight tools here publish no price for their top tier. That empty cell is a finding, not an omission, and this page never estimates one. Dify's figures say "per workspace" because that is the unit Dify bills, and every other figure carries the cycle its vendor states. Pricing and free tiers change often; check each vendor for current terms. Compiled August 2026.
Official pages: Dify pricing · Dify Enterprise · Langflow · Sim · CrewAI · Open WebUI · n8n pricing · LangGraph · Windmill pricing
A fair call
When Dify is still the right choice
Migrating off Dify means rebuilding flows by hand: no tool on this list publishes a Dify importer, and the retrieval side (chunking settings, indexed documents, evaluation history) does not move at all. For a large share of teams the two extra licence conditions never bind, and for those teams Dify remains the strongest single package in this category.
Dify is still right if...
- You run one workspace for one organisation. Single-tenant commercial use is explicitly allowed: the licence says Dify "may be utilized commercially, including as a backend service for other applications or as an application development platform for enterprises".
- You are content to keep the Dify logo in the console. The branding clause is "inapplicable to uses of Dify that do not involve its frontend", which is defined as the
web/directory or the web image under Docker. - You want a builder, an agent runtime and document retrieval in one Docker command. Nothing else here does all three: Langflow has no knowledge base of comparable depth and Windmill has none at all.
- Your Cloud team is three people or fewer. Professional covers 3 members and 50 apps for $590 per workspace per year, with no per-seat charge on top.
- You are choosing on project health. 153,094 stars, release 1.16.1 on 2026-07-28, and a push on 2026-08-21 are not the profile of a stalled project.
Look elsewhere if...
- You need a second workspace: that is multi-tenancy as the licence defines it, and an Enterprise row on Cloud, so either price the contract or move to Sim or Langflow.
- You must ship the interface unbranded: "WebApp Branding Customization" is Enterprise-only, while Langflow under MIT has no branding clause at all.
- You need SSO on a self-hosted install: on Dify that sits behind the enterprise licence gate. Check the price of the same row elsewhere before assuming Dify is the expensive one; n8n puts SSO on a self-hosted tier at 8,000 EUR per year billed annually.
- You need an OSI-approved licence in writing: Langflow (MIT), Sim (Apache-2.0) and CrewAI (MIT) are the only three rows in the table that qualify.
- Your real job is chat over your own documents: Open WebUI covers that half for free at any size, with the branding clause biting only if you want to remove the branding above 50 end users in a rolling 30 days.
Common questions
Common questions about Dify alternatives
Is Dify open source?
Not in the sense the term normally carries. Dify's LICENSE file opens with "Dify is licensed under a modified version of the Apache License 2.0, with the following additional conditions". GitHub reports the licence as NOASSERTION and there is no SPDX entry for it, so it is not an OSI-approved licence. Dify's own homepage calls the Community Edition "Source-available" under an "Apache-2.0-derivative license", while its documentation says "Dify is open source." Both statements are the vendor's. The accurate description is source-available: the code is public, commercial use is allowed, and two named restrictions apply.
Can I use self-hosted Dify commercially for free?
Yes, within limits. The licence states that Dify "may be utilized commercially, including as a backend service for other applications or as an application development platform for enterprises", and the Enterprise FAQ says the Community Edition "can be self-hosted for free on your own infrastructure, with access to the core platform features", and adds that no licence key is required. Two restrictions apply: unless Dify authorises it in writing you may not "use the Dify source code to operate a multi-tenant environment", and you may not "remove or modify the LOGO or copyright information in the Dify console or applications". A third clause, addressed to contributors, records that the producer "can adjust the open-source agreement to be more strict or relaxed as deemed necessary", so today's terms are not a fixed floor. A single-tenant, branded deployment doing paid work is permitted.
What counts as multi-tenant under the Dify licence?
The licence defines it for you: "Within the context of Dify, one tenant corresponds to one workspace. The workspace provides a separated area for each tenant's data and configurations." The boundary is therefore a second workspace, not a second paying customer. The clause was broadened on 2024-09-09, when pull request #8143 changed "Multi-tenant SaaS service" to "Multi-tenant service" and dropped the SaaS qualifier. Dify's pricing page then sells "Multiple Workspaces", "Workspace Management" and "Commercial License Authorization" as Enterprise-only rows.
How much does Dify Cloud cost in 2026?
Sandbox is free with 1 team member, 5 apps, 200 message credits, shown with no monthly qualifier while both paid tiers say "per month", 50 MB of knowledge storage and 30 days of log history. Professional is $59 per workspace per month, or $590 per workspace per year, with 3 members and 50 apps. Team is $159 per workspace per month, or $1,590 per workspace per year, with 50 members and 200 apps. Enterprise is "Custom / Contact Sales" with no published price. All three self-serve tiers list "1 Team Workspace", so no self-serve amount buys a second workspace.
Is there a Dify alternative under a genuinely open-source licence?
Three of the seven here. Langflow is MIT, with one LICENSE file and zero enterprise-marked paths out of 11,642. Sim is unmodified Apache-2.0. CrewAI is MIT with no enterprise carve-out. The others are not: Windmill's backend is AGPL-3.0 "except any snippets of code under the compile flag 'enterprise'", and the Community image it publishes "also includes proprietary and non-public code"; n8n's Sustainable Use License is not open source by n8n's own documentation; LangGraph is MIT as a framework but its server ships under Elastic License 2.0; Open WebUI is BSD-3 plus a branding clause.
Is Dify dying, like Flowise and hosted Langflow?
No, and it is worth saying plainly. Dify has 153,094 GitHub stars, the repository is not archived, it was pushed to on 2026-08-21, and release 1.16.1 shipped on 2026-07-28 on a roughly monthly minor cadence. This page is a licence and pricing audit, not a health warning. Flowise was archived in mid-August 2026 (the sunset page says 10 August, the closing announcement says 13 August) after Workday acquired it, and DataStax removed hosted Langflow from Astra in April 2026, but neither of those events says anything about Dify's own activity.