ZeroSSL vs acme.sh
A detailed comparison to help you choose between ZeroSSL and acme.sh.
ZeroSSL Free SSL alternative to Let's Encrypt | acme.sh Free ACME client for automated SSL/TLS certificate management | |
|---|---|---|
| Overview | ||
| Rating | 3.8 (46 reviews) | 3.9 (71 reviews)✓ |
| Pricing model | freemium | free |
| Starting price | Free tier available | Free |
| Best for | Developers who want a Let's Encrypt alternative for CA diversification or need OV/EV certificates | DevOps engineers and sysadmins managing Let's Encrypt certificates across multiple domains and DNS providers in resource-constrained or Unix-native environments. |
| Tags | ||
| Tags | free tierapi access | free tieropen source |
| Visit ZeroSSL → | Visit acme.sh → | |
ZeroSSL
Pros
- + Alternative CA to Let's Encrypt — diversification
- + REST API for certificate management
- + Paid OV/EV available
Cons
- - Free tier limited to 3 certificates
- - Less established than Let's Encrypt
acme.sh
Pros
- + Deploy to 200+ DNS and hosting providers with minimal configuration
- + Renew certificates automatically without manual intervention
- + Run without root access or external dependencies
- + Support wildcard and multi-domain SAN certificates
- + Generate standalone certificates for non-web services
Cons
- - Shell-based implementation may be slower than compiled alternatives on high-volume deployments
- - Requires manual DNS API credential setup for DNS-01 validation
- - Limited GUI or web interface options for certificate management
Stay in the loop
Get weekly updates on the best new AI tools, deals, and comparisons.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.