rathole vs frp
Side-by-side comparison of features, pricing, ratings, and alternatives.
Rathole is a lightweight and high-performance reverse proxy for NAT traversal, written in Rust. It provides an alternative to frp and ngrok, offering a fast and reliable solution for developers and teams. Rathole is designed to simplify the process of exposing local services to the internet, making it easier to collaborate and deploy applications.
frp (Fast Reverse Proxy) is an open-source, self‑hosted solution that enables developers and IT professionals to expose local services to the internet securely. It works across Web, Windows, macOS, and Linux, providing flexible TCP, UDP, HTTP, and HTTPS tunneling. Designed for simplicity and performance, frp lets you configure proxy rules via a lightweight client‑server model, making it ideal for remote debugging, IoT device access, and internal tool exposure without complex VPN setups.
- High-performance and scalable
- Easy to set up and configure
- Secure and reliable
- Free and open-source
- Completely free and open source
- Runs on all major operating systems
- Supports both TCP and UDP with TLS encryption
- Highly configurable with simple file syntax
- Limited documentation and support
- Requires technical expertise for advanced configuration
- May require additional setup for complex use cases
- Requires manual server setup and maintenance
- Limited graphical UI; primarily CLI/config file driven
- Advanced features may need custom plugins or scripting
More alternatives & similar tools
Alternatives to rathole
View all →
Alternatives to frp
View all →
The Verdict
AI-generated from listing dataBoth rathole and frp are free, open‑source reverse proxies for NAT traversal, but rathole excels in Rust‑based performance and built‑in WebSocket/gRPC support, while frp offers broader protocol coverage (TCP + UDP) and easier cross‑platform deployment.
Key differences
- •Protocol support: rathole handles HTTP, HTTPS, TCP, WebSockets, gRPC; frp adds UDP and generic TCP/UDP forwarding.
- •Language and performance: rathole is written in Rust (high‑performance), frp in Go (widely used, slightly larger footprint).
- •Configuration style: rathole offers customizable options for advanced users; frp uses simple INI‑style files.
- •Platform reach: frp runs on Windows, macOS, Linux and containers; rathole is self‑hosted with no explicit OS list.
- •Community size: frp has far more GitHub stars (108,315) than rathole (13,971).
Pricing & value
Both are free and open‑source, offering comparable cost‑free value.
Ease of use / learning curve
frp uses simple INI‑style files and runs on all major OSes, making initial setup easier than rathole's advanced configuration.
Features & depth
rathole includes built‑in WebSocket and gRPC support plus detailed logging/metrics, which frp lacks.
Integrations & ecosystem
frp’s plugin hooks and cross‑platform container support give it a broader integration potential.
Support
Both rely on GitHub Issues and email; no commercial support listed for either.
Scalability
rathole highlights load balancing, failover, and high‑performance Rust implementation for scaling.
Security & privacy
Both provide automatic TLS/SSL encryption for secure connections.
Choose rathole if…
DevOps teams needing high‑performance Rust proxy with WebSocket/gRPC and detailed metrics.
Choose frp if…
Developers requiring quick cross‑platform setup, UDP support, and simple configuration.
Common questions
Is there any cost difference between rathole and frp?
No; both are free and open‑source.
Which tool supports UDP traffic?
frp supports both TCP and UDP; rathole does not list UDP support.
Do either provide graphical management interfaces?
Neither mentions a GUI; both are primarily configured via files or CLI.