Jami vs Element Call
Both are alternatives to Zoom. Here's how they stack up — verified facts, no spin.
Also searched as Element Call vs Jami — same comparison, one verdict.
Jami and Element Call are closely matched on ownership (90 vs 89) — this one comes down to pricing and to which trade-offs below you can live with.
Jami
Fully peer-to-peer calls with no server at all.
Jami is a GNU project for calls and messaging that works peer-to-peer and end-to-end encrypted, with no central server to run or trust. It is the most decentralized option — private by design, at the cost of some polish for large group meetings.
Element Call
Decentralized, end-to-end encrypted calls on the Matrix network.
Element Call is a native Matrix video-conferencing app: end-to-end encrypted by default, federated across Matrix homeservers, and free to use or self-host. It is the best fit for teams that want secure, decentralized calls with no single company controlling the infrastructure — calls can even happen between users on different homeservers.
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.
| Jami | Element Call | |
|---|---|---|
| Sovereignty ScoreOur transparent 0–100 composite for data ownership and exit cost. | 90 | 89 |
| Open source | Yes | Yes |
| Self-hostable | Yes | Yes |
| Local-first data | Yes | Yes |
| License | GPL-3.0 | AGPL-3.0 |
| Pricing | Free / open-source | Free / open-source (use element.io or self-host with a Matrix homeserver) |
| RAM to run it wellThe figure that actually matters, not the vendor's minimum. | Nothing server-side for one-to-one calls. The real requirement moves to whoever starts a group call: that device receives every participant's video, mixes it and sends the mixed stream back to each person, so its upload carries one outgoing stream per participant | 2–4 GB for Synapse, PostgreSQL, the LiveKit SFU and the MatrixRTC authorization service on one small box |
| Realistic running costWhat the box costs each month if you run it yourself. | $0 on Jami's default network (Savoir-faire Linux runs the bootstrap, TURN, DHT-proxy and name servers). If you run your own TURN and DHT node, a small VPS at roughly $5/mo, and every call it relays counts against that plan's bandwidth | $12–24/mo on a 4 GB VPS for Synapse plus LiveKit, but bandwidth is the real bill: the SFU sends each participant a copy of everyone else's video, so outbound traffic climbs with every person who joins |
| Setup timeHonest first-install estimate, not the marketing quickstart. | 5 minutes to install the app and create an account; an afternoon to stand up your own TURN server and DHT node | A weekend if you already run Synapse; longer if this is your first Matrix homeserver |
| Ongoing maintenanceThe part nobody budgets for. | Keep the app updated on every device. If you run your own TURN or DHT node, patch it like any small server and re-test it after firewall or router changes. There's no database to back up, but each person should export their account archive. | The homeserver flags Element Call needs are still marked experimental, so re-check them against the self-hosting doc on every Synapse and Element Call release. LiveKit and the auth service are separate things to patch, and LiveKit's UDP media ports (50000–60000) must survive every firewall change. |
Jami edges it on the Sovereignty Score, but the right pick depends on the trade-offs below.
Weighing both against staying on Zoom? Is Zoom free? What it actually costs →
Jami
Strengths
- +Fully peer-to-peer — no server to run
- +End-to-end encrypted by design
- +Cross-platform
Trade-offs
- −Less turnkey for big group meetings
- −Smaller ecosystem than Jitsi
Element Call
Strengths
- +End-to-end encrypted and decentralized (Matrix + LiveKit)
- +Federated — call across different homeservers
- +Use free online or self-host for full control
- +No account lock-in to a single provider
Trade-offs
- −Self-hosting means running a Matrix homeserver and LiveKit backend
- −Younger and less turnkey than Jitsi for large calls
- −Ecosystem is smaller than mainstream conferencing tools
Which one fits you
The trade-offs above, turned into a decision. Find the line that describes your team.
Choose Jami
if a lower exit cost matters more to you than any single feature, and fully peer-to-peer — no server to run.
Choose Element Call
if end-to-end encrypted and decentralized (Matrix + LiveKit).
Neither, yet
if both carry a real cost you should weigh first — less turnkey for big group meetings, and self-hosting means running a Matrix homeserver and LiveKit backend. 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.
Self-hosting Jami
Nothing server-side for one-to-one calls. The real requirement moves to whoever starts a group call: that device receives every participant's video, mixes it and sends the mixed stream back to each person, so its upload carries one outgoing stream per participant RAM · 5 minutes to install the app and create an account; an afternoon to stand up your own TURN server and DHT node
$0 on Jami's default network (Savoir-faire Linux runs the bootstrap, TURN, DHT-proxy and name servers). If you run your own TURN and DHT node, a small VPS at roughly $5/mo, and every call it relays counts against that plan's bandwidth
Self-hosting Element Call
2–4 GB for Synapse, PostgreSQL, the LiveKit SFU and the MatrixRTC authorization service on one small box RAM · A weekend if you already run Synapse; longer if this is your first Matrix homeserver
$12–24/mo on a 4 GB VPS for Synapse plus LiveKit, but bandwidth is the real bill: the SFU sends each participant a copy of everyone else's video, so outbound traffic climbs with every person who joins
Jami vs Element Call — common questions
Is Jami a better fit than Element Call for video conferencing?
It depends on what you are optimising for, and the honest split is this: Jami scores 90 to Element Call's 89 on data ownership and exit cost, so it is the safer choice if you care about being able to leave. Element Call earns its place on a different axis — end-to-end encrypted and decentralized (Matrix + LiveKit). Neither is a wrong answer for every team; the table above is the actual comparison.
What happens if we want to switch later?
Jami keeps its data local or in open formats, so leaving is an export rather than a negotiation. Element Call 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 Jami or Element Call?
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 Jami and Element Call both alternatives to Zoom?
Yes — both appear in our Zoom comparison, which is why they are worth putting side by side. People usually arrive here already having decided to move off Zoom and now choosing between the two replacements, which is a narrower and much easier question.
Related alternative guides
Facts verified 2026-07-12. Licenses and pricing change — spotted something out of date? That's a correction we want.