Introduction: Why Compare Jitsi and Janus?
WebRTC (Web Real-Time Communication) has changed how we connect online. From video calls to live streaming and online classes, it allows people to communicate directly in the browser without downloading anything.
Two major open-source tools built on WebRTC are Jitsi and Janus. While they use the same core technology, they serve different purposes. In this guide, we’ll compare Jitsi vs Janus, explain their features, and help you decide which one fits your project best.
What Is WebRTC and Why It Matters
WebRTC is a free, open-source technology that allows real-time video, audio, and data sharing between devices using a browser. No plugins or apps are needed.
Common use cases of WebRTC:
- Video meetings (like Google Meet or Jitsi Meet)
- Live streaming and broadcasting
- Online learning platforms
- Customer support tools
- Communication between smart devices (IoT)
Both Jitsi and the Janus WebRTC server use WebRTC, but they have different strengths.
Jitsi WebRTC: Overview and Features
What Is Jitsi?
Jitsi is an open-source video conferencing platform. Its most popular product is Jitsi Meet, which lets people join video calls instantly—no sign-up or installation needed.
Key Features of Jitsi:
- Quick and easy video calls
- No account required to join
- High-quality video and sound
- Screen sharing
- Optional end-to-end encryption
- Mobile apps for iOS and Android
- Active and helpful community
How Jitsi Works (Architecture)
Jitsi is powered by Jitsi Videobridge, which uses an SFU (Selective Forwarding Unit). This means it forwards video and audio streams without processing them too much, making it lightweight and efficient.
Best Use Cases for Jitsi:
- Team video meetings
- Remote work and collaboration
- Virtual classrooms
- Family or personal video calls
- Internal business communication
Janus WebRTC: Overview and Features
What Is Janus?
Janus is a flexible WebRTC media server created by Meetecho. It’s not a full video conferencing app like Jitsi. Instead, it’s a powerful tool for developers who want to build custom communication platforms.
Key Features of Janus:
- Modular plugin-based design
- Supports streaming, video rooms, SIP, and more
- Works as both SFU and MCU (Multipoint Control Unit)
- Great for handling complex communication tasks
- Offers APIs for full control and integration
- Can be scaled for large applications
How Janus Works (Architecture)
Janus is like a media engine. It uses plugins to add features. For example, one plugin handles video rooms, another handles streaming. This makes it very flexible, but also more technical.
Best Use Cases for Janus:
- Custom live streaming platforms
- Interactive webinars or events
- Telemedicine applications
- Smart devices (IoT) communication
- Apps that mix video, audio, and data
Jitsi vs Janus: Side-by-Side Comparison
| Feature | Jitsi | Janus |
|---|---|---|
| Type | Ready-to-use video chat platform | Customizable WebRTC media server |
| Setup Time | Very easy (few minutes) | More complex (needs development) |
| Architecture | SFU-based with Jitsi Videobridge | Plugin-based, supports SFU and MCU |
| Scalability | Good for teams and small businesses | Great for large or complex apps |
| Focus Area | Video meetings and collaboration | Streaming, SIP, custom WebRTC logic |
| Mobile Support | Built-in apps available | Requires you to build mobile solutions |
| API Integration | Basic REST APIs | Advanced APIs and plugin system |
| Community | Large, active community | Smaller but skilled developer base |
Advantage and Disadvantage of Jitsi
Benefits of Using Jitsi:
- Quick Setup: Start meetings in minutes.
- No Login Needed: Great for non-technical users.
- Free and Open Source: No cost, full access to code.
- Good Performance: Works well for small to medium groups.
- Security Options: Optional encryption and authentication.
Limitations of Jitsi:
- Not very customizable
- Limited for advanced use cases like streaming or SIP
Advantage and Disadvantage of Janus
Benefits of Using Janus:
- Highly Flexible: Great for custom-built apps.
- Modular Design: Add only the features you need.
- Supports Complex Use Cases: SIP, data channels, streaming.
- Developer Friendly: Ideal for full control over WebRTC.
Limitations of Janus:
- Requires programming and setup knowledge
- No user interface — you must build one yourself
- Smaller community compared to Jitsi
Jitsi vs Janus: Performance Insights
Latency
- Jitsi: Low latency in small and medium meetings.
- Janus: Better for advanced or low-latency scenarios like live events.
Bandwidth Use
- Jitsi: Manages bandwidth well using SFU.
- Janus: Offers more control over bitrate, codecs, and streams.
Scalability
- Jitsi: Good for most team-based setups, can scale horizontally.
- Janus: Excellent for large platforms using load balancing and plugin control.
Security: How Safe Are Jitsi and Janus?
- Jitsi supports TLS, encryption, and optional end-to-end encryption in supported browsers.
- Janus gives full flexibility for security, but developers must configure it properly.
In both cases, server configuration and infrastructure setup are key to strong security.
Integration Options
- Jitsi: Can be embedded into websites or used with tools like Slack and Microsoft Teams.
- Janus: Better suited as the back-end engine of a custom-built application, with powerful APIs for integration.
Community and Support
- Jitsi: Backed by a large and active open-source community.
- Janus: Smaller user base, but highly skilled developers and strong documentation from Meetecho.
Conclusion
Choosing between Jitsi vs Janus depends on your project needs:
Use Jitsi if you want a plug-and-play video conferencing solution.
Use Janus if you’re building a custom platform that needs full control over media handling.
Both are powerful tools — one is built for simplicity and speed, the other for flexibility and control.
Ready to launch your WebRTC project? Whether you choose Jitsi or Janus, start small, test thoroughly, and scale as you grow!