Ditto vs CopyQ in 2026: Still the Real Rivalry

New clipboard apps launch every year with gradient marketing. The rivalry that still decides most power-user installs is older: Ditto versus CopyQ. Both are free and open source. Both remember far more than Win+V. They optimize for different humans.

If Win+V is still enough, neither is required. When Built-In History Is the Correct Tool

What each project says it is

Ditto (sabrogden/Ditto on GitHub): an extension to the Windows clipboard. Copy something; Ditto stores it in a database; retrieve it later. Text, images, HTML, custom formats. Local first — no login, no cloud, no telemetry. Default hotkey Ctrl+\`. Actively released in 2026 (3.25.x installer on the repo).

CopyQ (hluk/CopyQ): an advanced clipboard manager with editing and scripting. Tabs. Tags and notes. CLI. JavaScript-like commands. Ignore copies from some windows or containing some text. Windows, Linux, and macOS. Documentation lives on Read the Docs; a command repo exists for sharing scripts.

Those two self-descriptions are the review.

Search and everyday retrieve

Both search a real history, which already beats Win+V’s 25-item filter.

Ditto’s loop is the one people teach in a hallway: open list, type, Enter. The UI looks like 2012. That is not an insult. It is why the tool stays out of the way.

CopyQ’s loop can be the same — tray or copyq toggle, filter, Enter — or it can be a tab named “URLs” and a command that already cleaned the item. Search is not the headline; the headline is what happens *around* search.

Pick Ditto if the daily motion is retrieve. Pick CopyQ if the daily motion is retrieve *after a rule fired*.

Scripting and automation

This is CopyQ’s win, and it is not close.

CopyQ documents a scripting API, copyq add, copyq read, copyq copy, custom commands bound to shortcuts or to clipboard change. People use it to strip tracking query parameters, to reject copies that look like passwords, to write images into a tab.

Ditto has extras and a long options dialog. It is not a scripting platform in the CopyQ sense. For C#-style macros with a vendor GUI, that is ClipboardFusion, not Ditto — ClipboardFusion vs Ditto.

If the reason for shopping is “I want the clipboard to run code,” install CopyQ and do not spend a week trying to make Ditto into CopyQ.

RAM, startup, and texture

Both are native enough (MFC-ish C++ for Ditto, Qt for CopyQ). Both typically beat Electron shelves on RAM. Exact megabytes depend on how many images the database kept.

Ditto often feels lighter on a 8 GB laptop because the default UI is a small popup. CopyQ’s main window and tray can be trimmed; the default is more application.

Neither should be sold as “zero cost.” They watch the clipboard. That is CPU at the margin and a disk file that grows if retention is sloppy.

If RAM is the deciding axis, stay on Win+V or stay on Ditto with a tight max-item cap. The shortlist is in lightweight clipboard managers that stay under 50 MB. Do not switch to Edge-Drop or another Electron app to save memory. That would be the wrong direction.

Platforms

Ditto: Windows.

CopyQ: Windows, Linux, macOS 13+ (the project’s current line; older docs mentioned 10.15).

A dual-boot or a home Linux box is a CopyQ argument all by itself. Learning one set of commands is worth more than a slightly nicer Windows popup.

Privacy and ignore rules

Both are local by default. Ditto advertises that loudly. CopyQ can do more *about* what it records.

CopyQ’s ignore-by-window and ignore-by-text are the correct answer to “I also copy from a password manager.” Ditto can exclude programs in configuration; CopyQ documents it as a headline feature.

Neither is a vault. An unlocked session can read the history. Clipdiary’s AES-256 is the encryption-oriented cousin; that is a different product.

Microsoft Automatically sync text that I copy is independent. Leave it off if Ditto or CopyQ is the store. Three logs of the same OTP is not a strategy. Should You Enable History If You Only Copy Passwords?

Files, images, capture

Both can store images. Both can deal with more formats than Win+V’s text/HTML/bitmap list. Neither is a first-class file *shelf* with native drag-out of stacks into Photoshop.

Neither is a capture tool. Pair either with Snipping Tool or ShareX. ClipClip bundles capture; that is its pitch, not Ditto’s or CopyQ’s.

Who should not switch

This is the part most comparison posts skip.

Stay on Ditto if it already finds last week’s string in under two seconds. CopyQ will not pay back the relearn unless a script is queued.

Stay on CopyQ if the commands already run. Ditto will feel like a demotion the first time a URL lands with utm_ still attached.

Stay on Win+V if the failed-job tally is near zero. Open source is not a moral upgrade.

Do not switch because a 2026 listicle used the word “modern.” Ditto’s UI is the usual complaint and the usual irrelevance.

Do not switch to chase cloud. Neither project wants to be ClipboardFusion Pro.

A 30-minute bake-off

1. Keep the current tool installed.
2. Install the other one. Change hotkeys so they do not collide (especially \` next to an IME).
3. Copy: a paragraph, a URL with tracking junk, a small snip, a password-manager copy (use a dummy).
4. See which tool still has the paragraph after a restart.
5. See which tool ignored — or could be told to ignore — the dummy password.
6. Uninstall the loser. Turn Windows history off so only one log remains.

That bake-off is more truthful than feature tables that pretend both tools have the same shape.

Network and sync myths

Ditto can share clips over a local network if someone configures it. That is not ClipboardFusion cloud and not Microsoft account sync. It is a power feature with a trust boundary (who is on that network).

CopyQ can synchronize tabs via files or user-built commands. Also not a consumer cloud.

Neither project should be bought as “the 2026 cloud clipboard.” If that is the job, read the ClipboardFusion compare table or accept Microsoft’s text-only sync with the privacy costs already documented.

Forum posts that say “CopyQ replaced Dropbox for my clipboard” describe a custom setup, not a default.

2026 status check

Both projects are alive. Ditto still ships Windows installers from GitHub. CopyQ still ships multi-OS packages (including winget/Scoop/Chocolatey on Windows). The rivalry did not get replaced by Pasteboard’s nicer list or by Edge-Drop’s shelf. Those products took *other* jobs.

If a third app is winning a *different* job — Pasteboard for looks, ClipClip for capture, Edge-Drop for drag-out — that does not retire this rivalry. It just means the user was never in it.

The fork remains:

• Ditto — Windows, search, local, simple loop.
• CopyQ — any desktop OS, scripts, tabs, rules.

Pick one. Leave the other for someone else.

Related reading

• ClipboardFusion vs Ditto: Macros or Lightweight History?
• ClipClip vs Ditto: Folders and Editing vs Speed
• Best Clipboard Managers for Windows in 2026
• Does Windows Clipboard Sync Upload What You Copy?

Sources

• Ditto repository — product definition, local-first policy, 2026 releases.
• CopyQ homepage — feature list, ignore rules, CLI examples, platform support.
• CopyQ scripting docs — the automation surface Ditto does not match.
• Using the clipboard (Microsoft Support) — the built-in baseline both tools are measured against.

Copy. Stack. Drop.

Transform your clipboard into an interactive edge shelf. Stack, pin, and drag assets into any app with zero friction.

Download for Windows Get from Microsoft Store

How to Install Guide · First 10 Minutes Guide · Drag & Drop Guide · Edge-Drop vs Win+V · Support