$ k8scalc compare longhorn openebs
Longhorn vs OpenEBS
Longhorn vs OpenEBS for Kubernetes persistent storage — compare replica strategies, backup support, UI, and local vs distributed storage options.
FeatureLonghornOpenEBS
Web UI
Built-in
None
S3 backup (built-in)
Yes
Via Velero
Replicated block storage
Yes—
Yes (cStor / Mayastor)—
Local PV (node storage)
No
Yes (LocalPV)
NVMe / high-performance
Moderate
Yes (Mayastor)
Thin provisioning
Yes—
Yes—
Snapshots
Yes—
Yes—
Setup complexity
Low
Low–Moderate
CNCF status
Incubating
Sandbox
Verdict
Longhorn and OpenEBS are both CNCF projects for Kubernetes storage. Longhorn has a significant UX advantage — its built-in web UI for volume management and backup monitoring has no equivalent in OpenEBS. OpenEBS offers more storage engine flexibility: cStor (replicated block), Mayastor (high-performance NVMe), and local PV for node-local storage. For a straightforward replicated block storage with S3 backup, Longhorn wins. For teams needing high-performance NVMe storage or node-local PVs in a mixed environment, OpenEBS is worth evaluating.