Directus vs Markdown files in Git
Both are alternatives to Contentful. Here's how they stack up — verified facts, no spin.
Also searched as Markdown files in Git vs Directus — same comparison, one verdict.
Markdown files in Git is open source (N/A — plain files in your own repository) and Directus is not (Monospace Sustainable Core License 1.0 (MSCL-1.0-GPL; source-available) — from Directus 12, June 2026; BSL 1.1 before) — so the real question is whether you want to own the headless cms stack or rent it.
Directus
TOP PICKAn instant API and admin app over any SQL database you already have.
Directus takes a different route: point it at a SQL database — new or existing, with your own schema — and it generates a REST and GraphQL API plus an admin interface on top, without owning or altering your data model. That matters most for the very common case where content already lives in a database that other systems also use. Around 37k stars. The licence needs stating precisely: Directus uses the Business Source License 1.1, which converts to GPL after a delay and is free below a revenue threshold — source-available rather than open source, despite frequent mislabelling.
Markdown files in Git
For developer-owned content, the CMS may be the thing to remove.
Worth asking before choosing any of the above: does non-technical staff actually edit this content? A great many headless CMS deployments serve documentation and marketing pages maintained entirely by developers — content that could be Markdown files in the repository, reviewed in pull requests, deployed by CI, with no server, no API call metering and no vendor. Every modern framework reads Markdown natively. This is not a product; it is a scope check, and it is the right answer more often than the category admits.
Side by side
10 points of comparison, every one read from a verified field. Green marks the side that wins a row outright. A dash means we do not hold that fact — never that it is zero.
| Directus | Markdown files in Git | |
|---|---|---|
| Sovereignty ScoreOur transparent 0–100 composite for data ownership and exit cost. | 72 | 99 |
| Open source | No | Yes |
| Self-hostable | Yes | Yes |
| Local-first data | Yes | Yes |
| License | Monospace Sustainable Core License 1.0 (MSCL-1.0-GPL; source-available) — from Directus 12, June 2026; BSL 1.1 before | N/A — plain files in your own repository |
| Pricing | Free to self-host on the Core tier. Since Directus 12, higher limits and extra features need a licence key (a free key is offered); Directus Cloud and commercial licences are paid. | Free. There is nothing to host. |
| RAM to run it wellThe figure that actually matters, not the vendor's minimum. | 2 GB for the Directus container, the vendor's recommended minimum, plus room for PostgreSQL and Redis. That fits on a 4 GB VPS | — |
| Realistic running costWhat the box costs each month if you run it yourself. | $12–24/mo on a 4 GB VPS running Directus, PostgreSQL and Redis. Past three Studio users you also need a licence key: free under the Open Innovation Grant (under $5M revenue and 50 staff), otherwise from $499/mo | — |
| Setup timeHonest first-install estimate, not the marketing quickstart. | 30 minutes with the docs' compose file; an afternoon with HTTPS, file storage and a licence key | — |
| Ongoing maintenanceThe part nobody budgets for. | About one minor release a month to test before production. Read the breaking changes before a major: v12 changed the licence and the proxy-trust and health-check defaults. Keep the licence key current. | — |
Directus is Macrostack's recommended Contentful alternative, so it's our pick here.
Weighing both against staying on Contentful? Is Contentful free? What it actually costs →
Directus
Strengths
- +Works over an existing SQL database without changing your schema
- +Instant REST and GraphQL APIs plus a genuinely good admin interface
- +Your data stays in your own database, readable by anything else
- +No per-record or per-API-call metering
Trade-offs
- −Business Source License — not open source, and commonly mislabelled
- −A revenue threshold applies before a commercial licence is needed
- −Self-hosting means running a database and an application server
- −Fewer enterprise workflow features than Contentful
Markdown files in Git
Strengths
- +No CMS, no database, no API, no per-record billing — nothing to run
- +Content reviewed in pull requests alongside the code it describes
- +Complete version history for free
- +Every modern framework reads Markdown natively
Trade-offs
- −Non-technical editors cannot realistically contribute
- −No media library or scheduled publishing
- −Structured, relational content becomes awkward quickly
- −Wrong answer the moment a marketing team needs access
Which one fits you
The trade-offs above, turned into a decision. Find the line that describes your team.
Choose Directus
if works over an existing SQL database without changing your schema.
Choose Markdown files in Git
if you want the source and the option to fork it, and no CMS, no database, no API, no per-record billing — nothing to run.
Neither, yet
if both carry a real cost you should weigh first — business Source License — not open source, and commonly mislabelled, and non-technical editors cannot realistically contribute. If either of those is a dealbreaker for your team, the shortlist is wrong rather than the choice.
What it takes to run these yourself
Real requirements and honest running costs, not the vendor quickstart.
Directus vs Markdown files in Git — common questions
Is Directus a better fit than Markdown files in Git for headless cms?
It depends on what you are optimising for, and the honest split is this: Markdown files in Git scores 99 to Directus's 72 on data ownership and exit cost, so it is the safer choice if you care about being able to leave. Directus earns its place on a different axis — works over an existing SQL database without changing your schema. Neither is a wrong answer for every team; the table above is the actual comparison.
What happens if we want to switch later?
Directus keeps its data local or in open formats, so leaving is an export rather than a negotiation. Markdown files in Git is still self-hostable, so the files stay on your server either way — but it is not local-first by design, so check what its export produces before you rely on it.
Can I self-host Directus or Markdown files in Git?
Both can be self-hosted. The difference is what it costs you in time rather than whether it is possible — see the setup and maintenance rows above.
Are Directus and Markdown files in Git both alternatives to Contentful?
Yes — both appear in our Contentful comparison, which is why they are worth putting side by side. People usually arrive here already having decided to move off Contentful and now choosing between the two replacements, which is a narrower and much easier question.
Related alternative guides
Facts verified 2026-08-05. Licenses and pricing change — spotted something out of date? That's a correction we want.