Forgejo / Gitea Actions vs GitHub self-hosted runners
Both are alternatives to GitHub Actions. Here's how they stack up — verified facts, no spin.
Also searched as GitHub self-hosted runners vs Forgejo / Gitea Actions — same comparison, one verdict.
Forgejo / Gitea Actions is open source (MIT (Gitea) / GPL-3.0 (Forgejo)) and GitHub self-hosted runners is not (Proprietary (runner agent is MIT; the service is GitHub's)) — so the real question is whether you want to own the ci/cd & build automation stack or rent it.
Forgejo / Gitea Actions
Actions-compatible CI inside a self-hosted forge.
Forgejo and Gitea both ship a CI runner that speaks the GitHub Actions workflow format, so a large share of existing `.github/workflows` files run unchanged — including many marketplace actions, which are just repositories. That compatibility is the point: it is the only option here where migration can be a copy rather than a rewrite. The trade is that you are adopting a whole forge, not just a build system, so it suits teams already considering moving off GitHub entirely rather than teams that only want cheaper minutes.
GitHub self-hosted runners
Keep the workflows, move the minutes onto your own machine.
Not a replacement for Actions but the cheapest fix for its bill: register your own machine as a runner and change one line — `runs-on: self-hosted`. The workflows, the marketplace actions, the pull-request integration and the secrets all stay exactly as they are, and the per-minute charge stops. It is the highest-leverage move in this comparison for most teams. Two cautions. Self-hosted runners are not recommended for public repositories, because a pull request from anyone can execute code on your hardware. And the free status of these minutes is a policy, not a guarantee: GitHub announced a $0.002/min fee on them for March 2026 and postponed it indefinitely after the reaction, which tells you both that the risk is real and that pushing back worked.
Side by side
6 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.
| Forgejo / Gitea Actions | GitHub self-hosted runners | |
|---|---|---|
| Sovereignty ScoreOur transparent 0–100 composite for data ownership and exit cost. | 91 | 45 |
| Open source | Yes | No |
| Self-hostable | Yes | Yes |
| Local-first data | Yes | No |
| License | MIT (Gitea) / GPL-3.0 (Forgejo) | Proprietary (runner agent is MIT; the service is GitHub's) |
| Pricing | Free and open source; self-hosted on your own hardware. | No per-minute charge as of 2026-07-30 — you pay only for the machine. The announced platform fee remains postponed, not cancelled. |
Forgejo / Gitea Actions edges it on the Sovereignty Score, but the right pick depends on the trade-offs below.
Weighing both against staying on GitHub Actions? Is GitHub Actions free? What it actually costs →
Forgejo / Gitea Actions
Strengths
- +Workflow syntax is Actions-compatible — existing YAML often runs as-is
- +Many GitHub marketplace actions work because they are just repos
- +Comes with the git host, issues and packages in one binary
- +Forgejo is GPL-3.0 and community-governed under Codeberg
Trade-offs
- −Adopting it sensibly means moving your repositories too
- −Compatibility is high but not total — GitHub-specific contexts break
- −Smaller runner ecosystem; scaling out is manual work
- −Two similar projects with a contentious shared history to understand
GitHub self-hosted runners
Strengths
- +Zero migration: one line of YAML, everything else unchanged
- +Removes the minute bill immediately, including for large runners
- +Lets you use hardware GitHub does not offer — GPUs, ARM, big disks
- +Keeps the marketplace ecosystem and PR integration intact
Trade-offs
- −You are still entirely inside GitHub's pricing decisions — the fee was deferred, not withdrawn
- −Unsafe on public repositories: forked PRs would run on your machine
- −You own patching, isolation and cleanup between jobs
- −No sovereignty gain — this is a cost fix, not an independence fix
Which one fits you
The trade-offs above, turned into a decision. Find the line that describes your team.
Choose Forgejo / Gitea Actions
if you want the source and the option to fork it, and your data should stay on machines you control, and workflow syntax is Actions-compatible — existing YAML often runs as-is.
Choose GitHub self-hosted runners
if zero migration: one line of YAML, everything else unchanged.
Neither, yet
if both carry a real cost you should weigh first — adopting it sensibly means moving your repositories too, and you are still entirely inside GitHub's pricing decisions — the fee was deferred, not withdrawn. If either of those is a dealbreaker for your team, the shortlist is wrong rather than the choice.
Forgejo / Gitea Actions vs GitHub self-hosted runners — common questions
Is Forgejo / Gitea Actions a better fit than GitHub self-hosted runners for ci/cd & build automation?
It depends on what you are optimising for, and the honest split is this: Forgejo / Gitea Actions scores 91 to GitHub self-hosted runners's 45 on data ownership and exit cost, so it is the safer choice if you care about being able to leave. GitHub self-hosted runners earns its place on a different axis — zero migration: one line of YAML, everything else unchanged. Neither is a wrong answer for every team; the table above is the actual comparison.
What happens if we want to switch later?
Forgejo / Gitea Actions keeps its data local or in open formats, so leaving is an export rather than a negotiation. GitHub self-hosted runners 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.
Is Forgejo / Gitea Actions free?
Forgejo / Gitea Actions: Free and open source; self-hosted on your own hardware.. The other side of this comparison, GitHub self-hosted runners, is priced as No per-minute charge as of 2026-07-30 — you pay only for the machine. The announced platform fee remains postponed, not cancelled.. "Free" here means no licence fee — if you self-host it you still pay for the server, and the running cost row above is our honest estimate of that.
Can I self-host Forgejo / Gitea Actions or GitHub self-hosted runners?
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 Forgejo / Gitea Actions and GitHub self-hosted runners both alternatives to GitHub Actions?
Yes — both appear in our GitHub Actions comparison, which is why they are worth putting side by side. People usually arrive here already having decided to move off GitHub Actions and now choosing between the two replacements, which is a narrower and much easier question.
Related alternative guides
Facts verified 2026-07-30. Licenses and pricing change — spotted something out of date? That's a correction we want.