Linkwarden vs Wallabag: Which to Self-Host?

Quick Verdict

Linkwarden is for bookmark management and archival — save links, organize them, preserve pages. Wallabag is for read-later — save articles, strip the clutter, read them in a clean format. Different tools for different problems. Most users want one or the other, not both.

Overview

Linkwarden is a collaborative bookmark manager that archives pages and provides full-text search via Meilisearch. Wallabag is a read-later app that extracts article content for distraction-free reading. Both save web content, but their approach and audience are different.

Feature Comparison

FeatureLinkwardenWallabag
Primary purposeBookmark management + archivalRead-later / article reader
Content displayArchived page snapshotsExtracted article text (clean reader)
Collections/foldersYes (nested)Yes (tags only)
Full-text searchYes (Meilisearch)Yes (built-in)
Multi-userYes (teams, sharing)Yes (individual accounts)
Browser extensionChrome, Firefox, SafariChrome, Firefox (Wallabagger)
Mobile appNo native app (PWA)Native Android + iOS
Offline readingNoYes (mobile apps)
RSS feed outputNoYes
E-reader integrationNoYes (Kindle, Kobo)
Import from PocketYesYes
APIRESTREST (OAuth2)
SSO/OIDCYesNo
Docker services3 (app, PostgreSQL, Meilisearch)3 (app, PostgreSQL, Redis)
RAM usage~600 MB total~450 MB total

Installation Complexity

Both require PostgreSQL plus an additional service. Linkwarden needs Meilisearch for search. Wallabag needs Redis for caching.

Linkwarden requires 3 environment variables that must match between services plus NEXTAUTH_SECRET. Setup is straightforward but first-run can be slow as Meilisearch indexes.

Wallabag uses Symfony-style environment variables (SYMFONY__ENV__*) which are more verbose. The default credentials (wallabag/wallabag) must be changed immediately.

Winner: Comparable complexity. Neither is hard.

Performance and Resource Usage

MetricLinkwardenWallabag
RAM (idle)~600 MB (with Meilisearch)~450 MB (with Redis)
ArchivalScreenshots + PDFs + HTMLArticle text extraction
Search speedFast (Meilisearch)Good (PostgreSQL full-text)
Storage growthHigh (archived pages)Low (article text only)

Linkwarden uses more resources because Meilisearch is memory-hungry and page archiving stores full page copies. Wallabag is lighter because it only stores extracted article text.

Community and Support

MetricLinkwardenWallabag
GitHub stars9K+10K+
Project age2023+2013+
MaturityGrowing rapidlyMature and stable
Mobile appsPWA onlyNative Android + iOS
DocumentationGoodGood

Wallabag is the more mature project with native mobile apps. Linkwarden is newer but growing fast with active development.

Use Cases

Choose Linkwarden If…

  • You manage large collections of bookmarks
  • You need page archival (links that survive even if the site dies)
  • You share bookmarks with a team
  • You want visual organization with collections
  • Preserving the original page appearance matters

Choose Wallabag If…

  • You want a read-later app (like Pocket)
  • You read articles on mobile/offline
  • You want Kindle/Kobo integration
  • You prefer clean, distraction-free reading
  • You need RSS feed output of saved articles

Final Verdict

They solve different problems. Linkwarden is a bookmark manager with archival — it preserves links and pages for long-term reference. Wallabag is a read-later app — it saves articles for comfortable reading. If you read a lot of long-form articles, use Wallabag. If you curate bookmarks and want to ensure they never break, use Linkwarden.

Comments