Netmaker vs WireGuard
A detailed comparison to help you choose between Netmaker and WireGuard.
Quick Verdict
3.6/5
Netmaker
0 reviews
4.5/5
WireGuard
0 reviews
WireGuard is rated higher (4.5 vs 3.6). Netmaker is an open source platform for creating and managing WireGuard virtual networks. Self-hosted on your infrastructure. More feature-rich than raw WireGuard with a dashboard and ACL management. WireGuard is a modern open source VPN protocol, in the Linux kernel since 5.6 (March 2020). Around 4,000 lines of kernel code vs ~70,000-100,000 for OpenVPN (500,000+ with OpenSSL) and 400,000+ for IPsec stacks. Powers modern commercial VPN tunnels such as Mullvad's recommended protocol and NordVPN's NordLynx.
Netmaker Self-hosted WireGuard network management | WireGuard Modern VPN protocol — kernel-level performance | |
|---|---|---|
| Overview | ||
| Rating | 3.6 (0 reviews) | 4.5 (0 reviews)✓ |
| Pricing model | freemium | free |
| Starting price | Free tier available | Free |
| Best for | DevOps teams that want self-hosted WireGuard mesh networking with a dashboard, ACLs, and site-to-site links under their own control | Developers and teams self-hosting private networks between servers or running their own remote-access VPN, and anyone enabling the fastest protocol option on a commercial VPN |
| Features | ||
| IPv6 | ||
| DDoS protection | ||
| Automated backups | ||
| Snapshots | ||
| Managed option | ||
| Bare metal | ||
| GPU available | ||
| S3-compatible | ||
| Hourly billing | ✓ | |
| Free tier | ||
| Tags | ||
| Tags | free tieropen sourceself hostableapi access | free tieropen sourceself hostable |
| Visit Netmaker → | Visit WireGuard → | |
Netmaker
Pros
- + Free community tier is unlimited — self-hosted, Apache 2.0, unlimited networks and devices
- + Per-active-connection billing with hourly proration instead of idle seat licenses
- + Peer-to-peer WireGuard mesh keeps traffic off a central bottleneck; relay and egress gateways cover hard NAT cases
- + Deployment choice: fully self-hosted, Netmaker Cloud, or fully managed by their team
- + Dual-stack IPv4/IPv6 networks, private DNS, OAuth, ACLs; SCIM/SIEM/traffic logs on Business
Cons
- - Very small vendor (single-digit headcount, ~$2.8M raised) behind a critical-path product
- - Pricing page mixes current per-connection rates with legacy platform/network fees and a $99/month plan — billing basis is ambiguous
- - Community tier is community-supported only; SLAs are Enterprise-only
- - Self-hosting the server adds operational overhead (upgrades, database, TLS, monitoring)
- - Native mobile meshing not supported — phones connect via gateway and the standard WireGuard app
WireGuard
Pros
- + Free and open source — the protocol itself will never be a line item
- + Around 4,000 lines of kernel code: auditable by a single expert, minimal attack surface
- + Kernel-level performance on Linux; adopted as the underlying protocol by major commercial VPN providers
- + Dead-simple model: SSH-style key exchange, Cryptokey Routing, and automatic roaming between networks
- + Formal academic whitepaper defining the protocol and the reasoning behind each design choice
Cons
- - No vendor, no support contract, no SLA — availability is whatever your own infrastructure provides
- - Key distribution and configuration management are explicitly out of scope; multi-user setups need a control plane
- - Static key-to-IP peer table creates correlation risk on shared commercial gateways (why NordLynx adds double-NAT)
- - Unobfuscated UDP fingerprint — easily detected and blocked by restrictive networks
- - Requires operational comfort: patching, firewalling, and monitoring are all on you
Stay in the loop
Get weekly updates on the best new hosting and infrastructure providers, deals, and comparisons.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.