Zoraxy vs Traefik: Which Proxy to Self-Host?

Quick Verdict

Traefik is the better choice for Docker-centric self-hosters who want automatic service discovery and config-as-code. Zoraxy is the better choice if you want a feature-rich web UI with built-in uptime monitoring and GeoIP filtering. Traefik excels at automation; Zoraxy excels at visual management.

Overview

Both are modern reverse proxies with Docker integration, but they take fundamentally different approaches. Traefik configures routing via Docker labels on your containers — no web UI clicks needed. Zoraxy provides a full web interface for managing proxy rules, with the option to auto-discover Docker containers as upstream targets.

Traefik (v3.6) is a Docker-native edge router with label-based auto-discovery, automatic Let’s Encrypt, and 30+ built-in middleware. Configuration lives alongside your services as Docker labels.

Zoraxy (v3.3.1) is a Go-based reverse proxy with a web UI, bundling HTTP/HTTPS proxying, TCP/UDP stream proxying, uptime monitoring, GeoIP filtering, and a web SSH terminal.

Feature Comparison

Feature	Zoraxy	Traefik
Web UI	Yes (full management)	Read-only dashboard
Docker auto-discovery	Yes (container list)	Yes (label-based routing)
Automatic HTTPS	Yes (Let’s Encrypt)	Yes (Let’s Encrypt, ZeroSSL)
HTTP/2	Yes	Yes
HTTP/3 (QUIC)	No	Yes
TCP/UDP stream proxying	Yes (web UI)	TCP only (CE)
GeoIP filtering	Yes (built-in)	No (plugin required)
Uptime monitoring	Yes (built-in)	No
Web SSH terminal	Yes (built-in)	No
Rate limiting	No	Yes (middleware)
Authentication middleware	No	Yes (BasicAuth, ForwardAuth, etc.)
Middleware ecosystem	Limited	30+ built-in middleware
ZeroTier VPN	Yes (built-in)	No
Plugin system	Yes	Yes (Traefik plugins)
Prometheus metrics	No	Yes (built-in)
Distributed tracing	No	Yes (Jaeger, Zipkin, etc.)
Config model	Web UI + API	Docker labels + static file
Kubernetes support	No	Yes (Ingress Controller)
Swarm support	No	Yes (native)
Config storage	Files on disk	Docker labels / files
Multiple instances	No	Yes (clustered)

Installation Complexity

Traefik: Requires understanding the static/dynamic config split. You write a traefik.yml for global settings, then add Docker labels to each service container. The initial setup takes 15-30 minutes. After that, adding new services takes 30 seconds (just add labels).

Zoraxy: Single container, three ports, done. Adding proxy rules is point-and-click in the web UI. Initial setup takes 5-10 minutes. Adding new services takes about 30 seconds (through the web UI).

Winner: Zoraxy for initial setup. Traefik for ongoing management (labels are faster than UI clicks at scale).

Performance and Resource Usage

Metric	Zoraxy	Traefik
Idle RAM	100-150 MB	80-120 MB
With FastGeoIP	1-1.2 GB	N/A
Image size	~78 MB	~100 MB
Written in	Go	Go
Max throughput	Good	Very good

Both are Go-based and perform similarly for typical homelab workloads. Traefik has been optimized more extensively for high-throughput scenarios due to its larger user base and Traefik Labs’ commercial interest.

Winner: Traefik by a small margin.

Community and Support

Metric	Zoraxy	Traefik
GitHub stars	~5K	~53K
First release	2022	2016
Backed by	Individual developer	Traefik Labs (company)
Documentation	Wiki + README	Comprehensive docs site
Community guides	Few	Extensive
Enterprise version	No	Traefik Enterprise
Kubernetes support	No	Yes (mature)

Traefik’s community advantage is enormous — 10x the GitHub stars and backed by a company with commercial incentives to maintain quality.

Winner: Traefik by a wide margin.

Use Cases

Choose Zoraxy If…

• You prefer managing proxy rules through a web UI
• Built-in uptime monitoring eliminates the need for a separate tool
• GeoIP filtering is important for your setup
• You want TCP/UDP stream proxying through a visual interface
• Web SSH access to your server through the proxy UI appeals to you
• You run a smaller setup (under 10 services) and want simplicity

Choose Traefik If…

• You want zero-touch service discovery via Docker labels
• Config-as-code matters (routing defined alongside services in Compose files)
• You need middleware (rate limiting, authentication, headers)
• Prometheus metrics and distributed tracing are requirements
• You run Kubernetes or Docker Swarm
• You want the largest community and best documentation
• You frequently add and remove containers

Final Verdict

Traefik wins for Docker-heavy setups. Its label-based auto-discovery means you never manually add proxy rules — deploy a container with the right labels and it is proxied automatically. The middleware ecosystem covers rate limiting, authentication, and header manipulation that Zoraxy lacks.

Zoraxy wins for visual management. If you prefer clicking through a web UI over writing Docker labels, and you value built-in extras like uptime monitoring and GeoIP filtering, Zoraxy gives you more per deployment. It is a genuine alternative to running NPM + Uptime Kuma + GeoIP tools separately.

For most self-hosters running Docker: Traefik. For those who want a rich GUI with built-in monitoring: Zoraxy.

FAQ

Can I use Zoraxy and Traefik together?

You could, but there is no reason to. They solve the same problem in different ways. Pick one and use it as your primary proxy.

Does Zoraxy support Docker labels like Traefik?

No. Zoraxy’s Docker integration discovers running containers and offers them as upstream targets in the web UI. You still manually create proxy rules. Traefik’s label approach is fully automatic — the container itself declares its routing.

Which is easier for non-technical users?

Zoraxy. Its web UI is self-explanatory — click to add a proxy rule, toggle to enable HTTPS. Traefik’s label-based configuration requires understanding Docker Compose and YAML syntax.

Related

• How to Self-Host Zoraxy with Docker
• How to Self-Host Traefik with Docker
• Zoraxy vs Nginx Proxy Manager
• Nginx Proxy Manager vs Traefik
• Traefik vs Caddy
• Best Self-Hosted Reverse Proxy
• Docker Compose Basics