Huly vs Rocket.Chat: which one to choose in 2026?
Both are open source alternatives to Slack. We compare license, tech stack and features to help you decide which fits your team best.
| Huly | Rocket.Chat | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Productivity | Productivity |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | MIT |
| GitHub stars | ~11k | ~41k |
| Tech stack | Rust, React, MongoDB | Node.js, Meteor, MongoDB |
| Replaces | Linear, Notion, Slack | Slack |
Rocket.Chat has more GitHub stars, which usually indicates a larger community (not necessarily that it's the best option for your use case).
Huly
Projects + chat + docs in one, an alternative to Linear/Notion/Slack.
ℹ️ This single-container docker-compose doesn't match how Huly is actually deployed: the hardcoreeng/huly image doesn't exist, and the real project is ~10 independent microservices orchestrated by the official installer. Use huly-selfhost (github.com/hcengineering/huly-selfhost) for a deployment that actually works — we aren't rewriting that topology here without being able to verify it service by service.
Pros
- Replaces three different SaaS tools with a single deployment
Things to consider
- Young project, integration ecosystem still limited
- This catalog's docker-compose isn't deployable as-is (see note above) — use the official huly-selfhost installer
Rocket.Chat
Self-hostable team chat, an alternative to Slack.
Pros
- MIT license
- No message history limit
Things to consider
- MongoDB with a replica set adds operational complexity
Key features
Huly
- Linear-style issues and projects
- Team chat and channels
- Collaborative documents
Rocket.Chat
- Native channels, threads and video calls
- Bridging with Matrix, Slack and WhatsApp
- Apps and bots via the Rocket.Chat Marketplace
Already know which one you prefer?
Add it to your Stack Builder and generate a ready-to-deploy docker-compose.yml alongside the rest of your stack.
Go to Stack Builder