ShardHex vs Duplicati

Side-by-side comparison

What each tool actually does

Duplicati

Duplicati is a free, open-source backup tool that creates encrypted, compressed, deduplicated, incremental backups to a single cloud destination. You point it at a source folder and a backend (S3, Backblaze B2, Google Drive, OneDrive, Dropbox, SFTP, WebDAV, ~30 supported), set a schedule, and it backs up incrementally — only changed blocks are uploaded after the initial full backup.

The key value is point-in-time restore. Duplicati keeps versioned snapshots, so you can restore your folder as it was last Tuesday, three weeks ago, or six months ago. Combined with deduplication, the storage overhead for keeping months of history is small.

Duplicati had a reputation for occasional database corruption issues in earlier versions; the project has invested heavily in fixing this and recent versions are considered reliable, though sysadmins still recommend periodic restore testing as a sanity check.

ShardHex

ShardHex is a snapshot tool, not a versioned backup tool. You take a file (or batch of files), encrypt it client-side with AES-256, split it into N erasure-coded shards using Reed-Solomon, and upload the shards to N different cloud providers. Any K of the N shards can rebuild the original.

There is no chronological history — what's currently in the clouds is what you'll restore. If you re-split the same file later, you produce a new shard set that overwrites the old one (or you keep both manifests if you want).

The optimization axis is cross-provider redundancy: ShardHex deliberately spreads data so no single cloud can take it all. Duplicati's destination, by contrast, is one cloud — if that cloud bans your account or deletes your data, the entire versioned history is gone with it.

When Duplicati is the right answer

• You want point-in-time restore — "give me my Documents folder as of three weeks ago".
• You're backing up a large, frequently-changed working folder where deduplication and incrementals matter.
• You only have one cloud destination (or are OK with running independent backup jobs to multiple).
• You want a fully open-source, mature project with active community.
• You need cross-platform support — Mac, Linux, headless servers.
• You want zero ongoing cost.
• The cost of "this one cloud disappears entirely" is acceptable — losing the whole versioned history with it.

When ShardHex is the right answer

• You're backing up finished archives (tax records, photo collections, recovery keys, family videos) where versioned history isn't needed.
• "This single cloud disappears" is unacceptable — you need redundancy across providers.
• You want the simplest possible backup model: one snapshot, distributed.
• You already have multiple cloud accounts and want to use them as one resilient backup target.
• You're on Windows.
• You'd rather pay $19.99 once than run a versioned-backup tool that needs occasional database maintenance.

Can you use both? Yes — they're orthogonal.

The most robust personal backup setup actually uses both:

• Duplicati for daily backups with versioned history of your active folders. Backs up to one cloud (e.g. Backblaze B2). You can restore any point in time over the last N months.
• ShardHex for monthly or quarterly snapshots of irreplaceable archives, distributed across N clouds with K-of-N redundancy. If your Backblaze account dies, your important archives survive.

This combination covers both axes that single-tool backups miss: time (Duplicati) and cross-provider failure (ShardHex). The two never conflict because they target different files (active workspace vs cold archive).

A note on "Duplicati to multiple destinations"

Duplicati can be configured to back up the same source to multiple destinations — but each destination is an independent backup job. You run two (or three) full backup jobs, each writing the complete dataset to one cloud.

That works, and it's a legitimate strategy. The cost is storage proportional to the number of destinations: 2 clouds = 2× storage; 3 clouds = 3×. ShardHex's approach (5-of-3 = 1.67×) is mathematically more storage-efficient for the same loss tolerance, at the cost of needing all N pieces present to perform a restore (vs Duplicati's any-one-destination-works).

Pick based on which axis matters more to you: storage efficiency (ShardHex) or restore-from-any-single-cloud simplicity (Duplicati to multiple).

Honest summary

Duplicati is a more complete backup tool than ShardHex if you need versioning. It's mature, free, cross-platform, and the historical reliability concerns have largely been addressed. For a typical "back up my computer" use case, Duplicati to a paid Backblaze B2 account is a great answer.

ShardHex doesn't try to compete on the versioning axis. It targets the specific problem of "this snapshot must survive any single cloud disappearing", which Duplicati doesn't natively solve. If that's the problem you have, ShardHex is purpose-built; if not, Duplicati is probably enough on its own.