Best Fider Alternative - Quackback vs Fider (2026)

Quackback vs Fider

Both are open source. Quackback adds roadmaps, changelogs, and AI agent support to the open source feedback stack.

Fider is a lightweight open-source feedback tool focused on voting. Quackback extends the open-source model with roadmaps, changelogs, AI features, and native integrations.

Feature-by-feature comparison

Feature	Quackback	Fider
Core Features
Feedback Boards Collect and organize user feedback and feature requests	Yes	Yes
Public Roadmap Share your product plans publicly with users	Yes	No
Changelog Announce shipped features and updates	Yes	No
Auto-Notify Voters Email users when their requested feature ships	Yes	Yes
Integrations & API
Slack Integration Get notified about new feedback in Slack	Yes	No
Discord Integration Sync feedback notifications to Discord	Yes	No
Linear Integration Create Linear issues from feedback posts	Yes	No
Webhooks HTTP callbacks for feedback events	Yes	Yes
REST API Programmatic access to all feedback data	Yes	Yes
AI & Automation
AI Features AI-assisted triage and changelog drafting	Yes	No
MCP Server (AI Agents) AI agents can search, triage, and manage feedback	Yes	No
Authentication
Email OTP (Passwordless) One-time password login via email	Yes	Yes
OAuth (GitHub, Google) Sign in with existing accounts	Yes	Yes
SSO Enterprise single sign-on support	OIDC	OAuth2 (custom providers)
Customization & Hosting
Custom Branding Logo, colors, fonts, and corner radius customization	Yes	Logo + CSS
Docker Self-Hosting Deploy on your own infrastructure with Docker	Yes	Yes
License Open source license type	AGPL-3.0	AGPL-3.0

Two open source tools, different scope

Beyond basic voting

Fider and Quackback share the same philosophy: open source, self-hosted, and free under AGPL-3.0. The difference is scope. Fider is a focused voting tool — it collects feedback and lets users vote, and it does that well with a lightweight Go and React stack. But it stops there. No roadmap to show what is planned. No changelog to announce what shipped. No native Slack or Discord integration. No AI to help with triage as feedback volume grows. Quackback covers the full feedback loop in one deployment: boards, voting, public roadmap, changelog with voter notifications, and AI-powered duplicate detection through the MCP server.

For a broader survey of the space, see our guide to open source feedback tools and self-hosted feedback tools.

Who should choose which

Choose Fider if you receive a handful of feature requests per week, need a minimal resource footprint, and only need a voting board. Fider's Go binary runs well on 256MB of RAM and its simpler codebase is easier to audit. Choose Quackback if you need the full feedback cycle — collecting, prioritizing, building, and announcing — in one tool. Once your product hits 20+ submissions per day, Quackback's AI triage and native integrations save hours of manual work that Fider requires you to do by hand.

Migration

Both tools use PostgreSQL, so data migration is straightforward. Export your Fider posts and votes, then import into Quackback via CSV. Post titles, descriptions, vote counts, and statuses all transfer. Run both tools side by side during the transition — both deploy with Docker — and point your domain at Quackback once the data is verified.

Pricing comparison

Quackback

Free

Complete feedback platform (AGPL-3.0)

Feedback + roadmap + changelog
Slack, Discord, Linear integrations
AI features + MCP server

Get started

Fider

Free

Feedback voting tool (AGPL-3.0)

Feedback boards only
Webhooks only
No AI features

At scale

How costs compare at scale

Usage	Quackback	Fider
Software cost	$0	$0
Roadmap tool	Included	Separate tool needed
Changelog tool	Included	Separate tool needed
Effective cost	$0 (all-in-one)	$0 + extra tools

When to choose Fider

Choose Fider if you want a simple self-hosted voting tool and don't need roadmaps, changelogs, or native integrations. Fider uses a Go + React stack and has a smaller feature set that may be easier to manage if you only need basic feedback collection.

Where Fider excels

Lightweight Go + React stack with smaller resource footprint
Simpler codebase that's easier to audit and customize
Mature project with years of stability in production
Same AGPL-3.0 license and self-hosting model
Focused scope — does one thing (voting) well

Frequently asked questions

Are both Quackback and Fider truly open source?

Yes. Both are licensed under AGPL-3.0 and can be self-hosted. The key difference is scope: Fider focuses on feedback voting, while Quackback provides feedback boards, roadmaps, changelogs, and AI features in one package.

Is Quackback harder to self-host than Fider?

Both deploy with Docker. Quackback uses Docker Compose for a one-command setup. The setup process is comparable in complexity.

Can I migrate from Fider to Quackback?

Yes. You can export your Fider data and import it into Quackback via CSV. Both platforms use PostgreSQL, which makes data migration straightforward.

What is Fider's tech stack vs Quackback's?

Fider uses Go and React. Quackback uses TypeScript (TanStack Start, React 19, Drizzle ORM, PostgreSQL). Both self-host with Docker. The choice comes down to language preference and feature requirements.

Does Fider have a public roadmap feature?

No. Fider focuses on voting boards for collecting and prioritizing feedback. Quackback includes a public roadmap with kanban views and status columns, so users can see what is planned, in progress, and completed.

Which uses fewer server resources?

Fider's Go binary is lighter, typically running well on 256MB of RAM. Quackback requires more resources but includes a broader feature set — roadmaps, changelogs, AI features, and native integrations. The trade-off is resource footprint versus functionality.