FileCloud is enterprise file sharing and sync: Server on your infrastructure, Online as SaaS, network-share access, DLP, DRM, compliance, endpoint backup, and vendor support. Cotton is an open-source file cloud with a storage engine and browser UX as the product. This is not a scoreboard with fake certainty; it is a product-fit comparison for self-hosted file cloud decisions.
Tonido was CodeLathe's personal-cloud product from 2008 to 2022. Their own shutdown page says Tonido grew into FileCloud, an enterprise-class file sharing and sync platform. That matters for positioning: FileCloud is not a mysterious new hobby cloud; it is the business successor to an older personal-cloud line.
FileCloud's center of gravity is enterprise content collaboration: Server or Online, on-prem or cloud, dedicated regions, unlimited external users, team folders, network shares, activity trails, governance dashboards, compliance center, and security integrations. It is built for a company that already has files, users, auditors, and procurement.
AD/LDAP, SSO, NTFS permission carry-over, network share access, SIEM, antivirus/ICAP integrations, DLP, DRM, endpoint backup, Office add-ons, admin device controls, mature desktop/mobile clients, and vendor support. If those words are hard requirements, Cotton should not pretend to be the same product.
FileCloud's public pricing matrix and trial flow speak in business terms: Server or Online editions, user-license minimums, support, regions, compliance, and quote paths. Cotton's shape is deliberately smaller: open-source, one image plus Postgres, built for people and small teams that want to own a focused file cloud without buying an EFSS program.
FileCloud is strong when you need to modernize an existing estate: NTFS/network shares, CIFS/NFS, S3-compatible storage connectors, file gateway modes, and branch-office support. Cotton takes the opposite bet: own the file engine directly with content-addressed chunks, manifests, dedup, snapshots, versions, cautious reclaim, and WebDAV on that same pipeline.
FileCloud documents business-friendly preview and collaboration around Office files, PDF, DICOM, CAD, email files, and Office integrations. Cotton goes deeper on personal file-cloud UX: audio waveform with cover art, STL/OBJ/3MF 3D, HEIC, mobile PDF text, seekable video on encrypted storage, and real-time browser readiness.
FileCloud is the stronger answer for enterprise governance around existing storage. Cotton is the sharper answer when you want the cloud itself to be a focused, open-source file engine with modern browser UX, native Android, Windows/Linux sync clients, WebDAV, snapshots, and encryption in the normal path.
Cotton does not need to beat every long-established ecosystem on every surface. The useful comparison is narrower: storage behavior, privacy posture, recovery model, deployment shape, and product focus.
Cotton stores file content as chunks and manifests, so deduplication, verification, versions, snapshots, and cleanup share one mental model.
Compression and AES-GCM encryption sit in the normal storage path; the site does not sell isolated crypto speed as user-visible ingest speed.
Snapshots, versions, trash, and reclaim are positioned as ordinary file-cloud workflows, not emergency-only backend chores.
Cotton deliberately stays narrower than broad collaboration suites: files, previews, sharing, WebDAV, recovery, and operator visibility.
Cotton is the cleaner story when files, previews, shares, snapshots, versions, WebDAV, passkeys, admin diagnostics, and a compact Docker/Postgres deployment are the main problem.
Businesses that need enterprise governance, existing file-server access, procurement, support, and compliance checklists more than a new file UX.
You want a focused self-hosted file cloud with content-addressed storage, streaming crypto, snapshots, previews, WebDAV, sharing, passkeys, and a compact Docker deployment.
You need enterprise file sharing and sync with AD/LDAP, NTFS/network shares, DLP, DRM, compliance tooling, endpoint backup, and mature clients more than the Cotton storage-engine and recovery-model strengths.
Cotton is not trying to be a bigger suite than FileCloud. It is trying to be the sharper file cloud when the file engine itself is the product decision.
If the job is a focused personal or small-team file cloud with an owned storage engine, rich previews, and compact deployment, Cotton is the cleaner lane.
Last reviewed June 2026. Every line below links to its receipt - the actual issue, doc, or commit it came from. Competitors move fast; if a link goes stale, open an issue and we fix it.
Receipts
Not always. Cotton is a focused file cloud, not a clone of every app and integration in the older ecosystems. It fits best when file storage, previews, sharing, snapshots, WebDAV, security, and deployment simplicity are the main problem.
Because people searching for a self-hosted file cloud often start with the familiar names. The comparison makes the tradeoff explicit instead of pretending every product has the same goal.
If you need enterprise file sharing and sync with vendor support, AD/LDAP, NTFS/network shares, DLP, DRM, endpoint backup, compliance templates, and procurement around licenses, FileCloud is in that lane. Cotton is built for people and small teams who want a focused file engine and modern browser UX.