Zoraxy vs Cosmos Cloud: Which to Self-Host?
Quick Verdict
Cosmos Cloud is the better all-in-one platform — it bundles container management, reverse proxy, SSO authentication, and an app marketplace into a single deployment. Zoraxy is the better reverse proxy with extras — uptime monitoring, GeoIP filtering, and stream proxying bolted onto solid proxy functionality. Choose Cosmos if you want to replace Portainer + NPM + Authelia. Choose Zoraxy if you want to replace NPM + Uptime Kuma.
Overview
Both tools aim to consolidate multiple self-hosting tools into one. They take different approaches: Cosmos Cloud focuses on being a complete self-hosting platform (containers + proxy + auth + marketplace), while Zoraxy focuses on being a feature-rich reverse proxy (proxy + monitoring + GeoIP + SSH).
Cosmos Cloud (v0.20.2) bundles container management, a reverse proxy with automatic HTTPS, SSO/authentication, per-container firewall rules, a VPN module, and an app marketplace. It replaces Portainer + Nginx Proxy Manager + Authelia.
Zoraxy (v3.3.1) bundles HTTP/HTTPS reverse proxying, TCP/UDP stream proxying, uptime monitoring, GeoIP filtering, a web SSH terminal, and Docker container discovery. It replaces Nginx Proxy Manager + Uptime Kuma.
Feature Comparison
| Feature | Zoraxy | Cosmos Cloud |
|---|---|---|
| Reverse proxy | Yes (primary function) | Yes (built-in) |
| Automatic HTTPS | Yes (Let’s Encrypt) | Yes (Let’s Encrypt) |
| Container management | No (discovery only) | Yes (create, start, stop, remove) |
| App marketplace | No | Yes (one-click deployments) |
| SSO / Authentication | No | Yes (built-in) |
| Per-container firewall | No | Yes |
| VPN module | ZeroTier (built-in) | Yes (built-in) |
| Uptime monitoring | Yes (built-in) | Basic (health checks) |
| GeoIP filtering | Yes (built-in) | No |
| TCP/UDP stream proxy | Yes (web UI) | No |
| Web SSH terminal | Yes | No |
| Docker Compose support | No | Yes (stacks) |
| Docker auto-discovery | Yes (upstream list) | Yes (management) |
| Plugin system | Yes | No |
| Web UI | Yes | Yes |
| Setup wizard | No | Yes (guided) |
| Multi-user | No (single admin) | Yes (user accounts) |
| Idle RAM | 100-150 MB | 150-250 MB |
| Maturity | 4 years | 2 years (pre-1.0) |
| GitHub stars | ~5K | ~5K |
Installation Complexity
Cosmos Cloud: Single container with a guided setup wizard. First-time setup walks you through domain configuration, HTTPS, authentication, and security settings. The wizard takes 5-10 minutes and produces a working platform.
Zoraxy: Single container, three ports mapped. First login prompts for account creation. You are in the proxy management UI within 2 minutes. No wizard — you add proxy rules manually.
Winner: Cosmos Cloud. Its guided setup wizard reduces misconfiguration risk and configures multiple subsystems (proxy, auth, firewall) in one pass.
Performance and Resource Usage
| Metric | Zoraxy | Cosmos Cloud |
|---|---|---|
| Idle RAM | 100-150 MB | 150-250 MB |
| With extras | 1-1.2 GB (FastGeoIP) | ~250 MB |
| Image size | ~78 MB | ~200 MB |
| Written in | Go | Go |
Both are reasonable for modern hardware. Cosmos uses more baseline RAM because it runs more subsystems (container manager, proxy, auth). Zoraxy can spike to 1 GB+ with FastGeoIP enabled.
Winner: Zoraxy without FastGeoIP. Cosmos Cloud is heavier but includes more functionality per MB.
Community and Support
| Metric | Zoraxy | Cosmos Cloud |
|---|---|---|
| GitHub stars | ~5K | ~5K |
| First release | 2022 | 2023 |
| Primary maintainer | 1 (tobychui) | 1 (azukaar) |
| Documentation | Wiki + README | Docs site |
| Pre-1.0 | No (v3.3.1) | Yes (v0.20.2) |
| Active development | Yes | Yes |
Both have similar community sizes and single-maintainer risk. Cosmos Cloud is more explicitly pre-1.0, which means expect rougher edges and potentially breaking changes.
Winner: Tie. Both are comparable in community size and maturity risk.
Use Cases
Choose Zoraxy If…
- You already have a container manager (Portainer, Dockge) and just need a better proxy
- Uptime monitoring built into your proxy eliminates the need for a separate tool
- GeoIP filtering is important (block countries, geographic analytics)
- TCP/UDP stream proxying is needed
- You want web SSH access through your proxy UI
- You prefer a focused tool that does proxying exceptionally well
Choose Cosmos Cloud If…
- You are setting up a fresh server and want everything in one tool
- Container management with an app marketplace appeals to you
- Built-in SSO/authentication eliminates the need for Authelia or Authentik
- Per-container firewall rules are valuable for security
- You want a guided setup wizard
- Multi-user access with separate accounts is needed
Final Verdict
Cosmos Cloud wins as an all-in-one platform. If you want to deploy a single tool that gives you container management, reverse proxying, authentication, and an app marketplace, Cosmos Cloud consolidates the most functionality. It is the closest thing to a self-hosted Portainer + NPM + Authelia in one container.
Zoraxy wins as a reverse proxy. If you already have container management sorted (or prefer managing containers via CLI/Compose), Zoraxy is the better pure proxy. Its uptime monitoring, GeoIP filtering, and stream proxying are features Cosmos Cloud lacks.
For new self-hosters starting from scratch: consider Cosmos Cloud. For experienced self-hosters who want a better proxy: consider Zoraxy. For the most battle-tested options: use Portainer + Caddy or Nginx Proxy Manager separately.
FAQ
Can I use Zoraxy and Cosmos Cloud together?
You could run Zoraxy as your proxy and Cosmos Cloud for container management (disabling its built-in proxy), but this is unnecessarily complex. Pick one approach.
Which is more stable for production use?
Neither is as battle-tested as established tools like Nginx Proxy Manager or Portainer. Cosmos Cloud’s pre-1.0 status (v0.20.2) means more likely breaking changes. Zoraxy’s v3.3.1 suggests more stability, but it still has a smaller user base than established alternatives.
Do either support Kubernetes?
No. Both are designed for single-server Docker environments. For Kubernetes, use Traefik or Envoy-based ingress controllers.
Related
Get self-hosting tips in your inbox
New guides, comparisons, and setup tutorials — delivered weekly. No spam.