Wiki Software for Teams: Hosted and Self-Hosted Options
A practical comparison of team wikis and knowledge-base tools, including hosted workspaces and self-hosted software. Updated September 2026.
A good team wiki should make it easy to write, find and maintain useful information. The best choice depends less on the longest feature list and more on how your team works: who edits, where the data should live, how much administration you can handle, and whether documentation needs to sit beside projects and tasks.
This guide separates hosted workspaces from self-hosted wiki software. That distinction matters because the trade-offs are very different.
Quick comparison
| Tool | Hosting | Editing style | Good fit when… | Main trade-off |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Confluence | Cloud or Data Center | Rich editor | Your team already uses Jira or needs granular administration | More setup and administration than many small teams need |
| Notion | Hosted | Block editor | You want docs, databases and lightweight project information together | Very flexible structures can become inconsistent without clear conventions |
| ClickUp Docs | Hosted | Rich/block editor | You want documentation beside tasks and project work | Best fit is usually for teams already using ClickUp |
| BookStack | Self-hosted | WYSIWYG or Markdown | You want a simple documentation hierarchy and control of the server | You are responsible for hosting, updates and backups |
| DokuWiki | Self-hosted | Wiki markup | You want a lightweight wiki without a database server | The interface and editing model feel more traditional |
| MediaWiki | Self-hosted | Wikitext; visual editing can be added | You need a mature, extensible wiki with strong page history and linking | Administration and extension management require more technical work |
Start with these five questions
- Hosted or self-hosted? Hosted tools reduce server work. Self-hosted tools give you more control but make updates, backups and security your responsibility.
- How will people edit? A familiar rich-text editor lowers the barrier for occasional contributors. Traditional wiki markup can be efficient for experienced users but is a bigger change for many teams.
- How complex are permissions? Small teams may only need private/public spaces and a few roles. Larger organizations may need group-based permissions, guest access, audit controls or enterprise identity management.
- Does the wiki need to connect to project work? Confluence fits naturally with Jira; ClickUp Docs sits beside ClickUp tasks; Notion combines documents and databases. Dedicated self-hosted wikis keep documentation more separate.
- Who will maintain it? If nobody owns upgrades, backups and troubleshooting, self-hosting can become a burden even when the software itself is free.
Hosted wiki and knowledge-base tools
Confluence
Confluence is a strong fit for organizations already using Atlassian products. Its main advantages are structured spaces, permissions, templates and close Jira integration. Atlassian currently offers a Free plan for up to 10 users, with paid tiers adding more storage, permissions, support and administrative features. Check current Confluence plans on Atlassian.
Choose it when: documentation is part of a larger Jira/Atlassian workflow, or administration and permissions matter more than having the simplest possible editor.
Look elsewhere when: you have a very small team that mainly wants a lightweight place for notes and procedures.
Notion
Notion combines pages, databases and flexible blocks. It works well when documentation needs to sit beside meeting notes, lightweight project tracking or structured lists.
Choose it when: your team values flexibility and wants one workspace for several kinds of information.
Watch for: flexibility can turn into clutter. Agree on page ownership, naming and where important information belongs before the workspace grows.
ClickUp Docs
ClickUp makes the most sense as a wiki option when the team already manages work in ClickUp. Documentation can live close to tasks rather than in a separate system.
Choose it when: reducing tool switching matters and your project work is already in ClickUp.
Self-hosted wiki software
BookStack
BookStack is free, open-source and self-hosted. Its Books → Chapters → Pages structure gives teams a clear hierarchy, while the editor supports both WYSIWYG editing and Markdown. The project also documents built-in search, roles and permissions, page revisions, diagrams and common enterprise authentication methods. See BookStack's official feature overview.
Choose it when: you want straightforward internal documentation, prefer a defined hierarchy, and are comfortable running a PHP/MySQL application.
DokuWiki
DokuWiki is a traditional self-hosted wiki that stores content in files rather than requiring a database server. That can make backups and small installations relatively straightforward. It is particularly attractive when you want a lightweight wiki and do not need the broader ecosystem or scale of MediaWiki.
Choose it when: simplicity, file-based storage and low infrastructure requirements matter.
For a direct technical comparison, see DokuWiki vs MediaWiki.
MediaWiki
MediaWiki is the software behind Wikipedia and is built for a more traditional, highly linked wiki model. Current MediaWiki releases require a web server, PHP and a supported database. Its extension ecosystem is a major strength, but it also means administrators need to pay attention to compatibility, upgrades and security. See MediaWiki's current requirements.
Choose it when: page history, internal linking, extensibility and a mature wiki architecture matter more than low-maintenance administration.
If you already run MediaWiki, our extension installation guide covers the current loading and update process.
Hosted vs self-hosted: what changes in practice?
| Decision | Hosted service | Self-hosted wiki |
|---|---|---|
| Updates | Handled by provider | Your responsibility |
| Backups | Provider handles platform backups; export options vary | You control and schedule backups |
| Server security | Provider manages underlying service | You patch the operating system, runtime and application |
| Data location/control | Depends on provider and plan | You choose the infrastructure |
| Customization | Limited to supported settings/apps | Potentially extensive, with more maintenance risk |
| Up-front admin work | Lower | Higher |
A simple way to narrow the list
- Already deep in Jira: start by evaluating Confluence.
- Want flexible docs and databases: compare Notion with your current workflow.
- Already manage projects in ClickUp: test ClickUp Docs before adding another tool.
- Want a simple self-hosted documentation system: look closely at BookStack.
- Want a lightweight file-based wiki: evaluate DokuWiki.
- Need a mature, extensible traditional wiki: evaluate MediaWiki.
Before you migrate
Do a small test with real content before committing. Import a few long pages, tables, attachments and heavily linked documents. Check search quality, permissions, exports and how much cleanup the migration creates. A tool that looks good in a blank demo can feel very different once your existing documentation is inside it.
Sources and freshness
This page was reviewed in September 2026. Product plans and technical requirements change, so verify time-sensitive details before purchasing or deploying. Primary references used for the self-hosted sections include MediaWiki documentation and BookStack documentation.