Envoy vs Traefik: Which Proxy to Self-Host?
Quick Verdict
Traefik is the better choice for self-hosters. It auto-discovers Docker containers, provisions SSL certificates automatically, and takes minutes to set up. Envoy is the more powerful proxy — better gRPC support, advanced load balancing, and deeper observability — but its configuration complexity makes it overkill for typical homelabs. Choose Envoy when you have specific requirements Traefik cannot meet.
Overview
Both are cloud-native, open-source reverse proxies designed for modern infrastructure. They come from different worlds: Traefik was built for Docker-centric environments where simplicity matters, while Envoy was built at Lyft for service mesh architectures where control and observability matter.
Traefik (v3.6) is a Docker-native edge router. Deploy a container with the right labels and Traefik automatically creates a route and provisions an SSL certificate. Configuration lives alongside your services as Docker labels.
Envoy (v1.37.0) is a CNCF graduated project used by Istio, AWS App Mesh, and Google Cloud’s traffic management. It handles L3/L4/L7 traffic with advanced load balancing algorithms, circuit breaking, automatic retries, and built-in Prometheus metrics.
Feature Comparison
| Feature | Envoy | Traefik |
|---|---|---|
| Docker auto-discovery | No | Yes (native labels) |
| Automatic HTTPS | No (external ACME required) | Yes (Let’s Encrypt built-in) |
| HTTP/2 | Yes (native) | Yes |
| HTTP/3 (QUIC) | Yes | Yes |
| gRPC proxying | Native (first-class) | Yes (basic) |
| gRPC-JSON transcoding | Yes | No |
| Load balancing algorithms | 5+ (Round Robin, Least Request, Ring Hash, Maglev, Random) | 3 (Round Robin, Weighted Round Robin, Sticky Sessions) |
| Circuit breaking | Yes (detailed thresholds) | Yes (basic) |
| Automatic retries | Yes (configurable) | Yes (configurable) |
| Rate limiting | Yes (local + global) | Yes (middleware) |
| Prometheus metrics | Yes (built-in, detailed) | Yes (built-in) |
| Distributed tracing | Yes (Zipkin, Jaeger, OpenTelemetry) | Yes (Jaeger, Zipkin, Datadog) |
| Web UI / Dashboard | Admin panel (stats, config dump) | Read-only dashboard |
| Config format | YAML (verbose, typed_config) | Labels + YAML (concise) |
| Dynamic config | xDS APIs (control plane) | Docker labels + file provider |
| TCP/UDP proxying | Yes (native) | Yes (TCP only in CE) |
| WebSocket | Yes | Yes |
| Hot restart | Yes (zero-downtime) | Yes (graceful) |
| Kubernetes support | Yes (Istio, native) | Yes (Ingress Controller, CRDs) |
| Service mesh | Yes (Envoy is THE mesh proxy) | Traefik Mesh (separate product) |
| Config complexity | High | Low-Medium |
| Learning curve | Steep | Moderate |
Installation Complexity
Traefik: One container, one static config file, then everything else via Docker labels. A basic working setup takes 10-15 minutes. Adding a new service is 3-4 label annotations on the container.
Envoy: One container, one YAML config file. But the YAML is verbose — a simple HTTP proxy requires 30+ lines with fully-qualified type annotations (typed_config with @type fields). Adding a new service requires modifying the config file and restarting. A basic working setup takes 30-60 minutes.
Winner: Traefik by a wide margin for self-hosting. Envoy’s config model is not designed for quick iteration.
Performance and Resource Usage
| Metric | Envoy | Traefik |
|---|---|---|
| Idle RAM | 50-100 MB | 80-120 MB |
| Under load RAM | 200-500 MB | 120-200 MB |
| Max throughput | Very high | High |
| Latency (p99) | Lower | Slightly higher |
| Concurrency model | Multi-threaded (worker threads) | Go goroutines |
Envoy is faster under extreme load. It was designed for Google-scale traffic at Lyft, handling millions of requests per second. Traefik handles thousands of requests per second comfortably, which is more than any homelab needs.
For self-hosting: performance is a tie. Both are orders of magnitude faster than your internet connection.
Community and Support
| Metric | Envoy | Traefik |
|---|---|---|
| GitHub stars | 26K+ | 53K+ |
| Backed by | CNCF (graduated) | Traefik Labs (company) |
| First release | 2016 | 2016 |
| Documentation | Extensive but dense | Clear, well-organized |
| Self-hosting guides | Few | Many (YouTube, blogs) |
| Enterprise version | No (single edition) | Traefik Enterprise |
Traefik has more self-hosting-specific documentation. Envoy’s documentation is comprehensive but targets infrastructure engineers building service meshes, not homelab users setting up a few Docker containers.
Winner: Traefik for self-hosting. Envoy for enterprise/infrastructure use cases.
Use Cases
Choose Envoy If…
- You run gRPC services and need native gRPC proxying with JSON transcoding
- You need advanced load balancing (Maglev, ring hash, least request)
- Circuit breaking with detailed thresholds is a requirement
- You want built-in Prometheus metrics with per-cluster, per-route granularity
- You are building or integrating with a service mesh (Istio)
- You need TCP/UDP proxying for non-HTTP workloads
- You have infrastructure engineering experience
Choose Traefik If…
- You want zero-touch container routing (deploy and it works)
- Automatic HTTPS with Let’s Encrypt matters
- You prefer config-as-code alongside your Docker Compose services
- You want a quick setup with minimal learning curve
- You run a typical homelab with 5-30 HTTP/HTTPS services
- You want one tool that handles routing, SSL, and middleware
Final Verdict
Traefik wins for self-hosting. Its Docker integration, automatic HTTPS, and label-based configuration make it purpose-built for the self-hosting use case. You can go from zero to fully proxied in 15 minutes.
Envoy wins for infrastructure. If you are running gRPC microservices, need advanced traffic management, or are building a service mesh, Envoy is the industry standard. But it solves problems most self-hosters do not have.
If you are reading this comparison to decide which proxy to run for your homelab: use Traefik. If you are reading it because you already know you need Envoy’s specific capabilities, use Envoy.
FAQ
Can Envoy replace Traefik for a homelab?
Technically yes, but you will spend significantly more time on configuration. Every service requires manual YAML edits instead of Docker labels. There is no automatic HTTPS — you need an external ACME client. For homelabs, the trade-off is not worth it.
Does Envoy support Docker labels like Traefik?
No. Envoy has no built-in Docker integration. You configure routes via static YAML or dynamic xDS APIs from a control plane. Some third-party tools (like Gloo Edge) add Docker label support on top of Envoy, but native Envoy does not.
Which has better Kubernetes support?
Both have excellent Kubernetes support, but in different ways. Envoy powers Istio (the most popular service mesh) and is the default data plane for many K8s environments. Traefik has a native Kubernetes Ingress Controller with CRDs. For pure ingress routing, Traefik is simpler. For full mesh networking, Envoy is the standard.
Related
Get self-hosting tips in your inbox
New guides, comparisons, and setup tutorials — delivered weekly. No spam.