Minecraft modding runs through two platforms now, and the choice between them has stopped being a matter of taste. Modrinth and CurseForge host the overwhelming majority of mods, modpacks, resource packs, and shaders that players download every day, but they operate on different ownership structures, different creator payout math, and different API philosophies. Modrinth, built as an open-source alternative since its 2020 launch, pays creators 75% of advertising revenue tied to project views and downloads. CurseForge, owned by Overwolf since it acquired the platform from Twitch in 2020, runs a commercially managed ecosystem that Overwolf says reaches 113 million monthly active users and 178,000 in-game creators across 1,500-plus games network-wide.
This comparison breaks down the two platforms for October 2026: catalog size, creator monetization splits, API access, launcher support, loader compatibility, and the 2023 Terms of Service controversy that sent a wave of mod authors toward Modrinth in the first place. The primary keyword here, “modrinth vs curseforge,” draws roughly 880 searches a month according to keyword-research tools, a smaller but far less contested query than broader Minecraft terms, and it reflects a real decision point for anyone building a modpack, installing mods through Prism Launcher, or publishing a project for the first time.
Don't miss new tech stories on Google
Add Tech Insider once in the Google app and our stories appear in your news suggestions.
Modrinth vs CurseForge at a glance
Before getting into the weeds, here is the condensed version. Modrinth is the newer, open-source-leaning platform with a transparent 75/25 creator split and a public API capped at 300 requests per minute. CurseForge is the older, larger platform under Overwolf’s commercial umbrella, with deeper legacy catalog depth, tighter API controls, and payout terms that vary by program. Neither platform has published a fully audited, apples-to-apples user count for Minecraft specifically, so treat any raw user-base comparison with some skepticism.
| Dimension | Modrinth | CurseForge |
|---|---|---|
| Owner/operator | Independent Modrinth company | Overwolf (acquired from Twitch in 2020) |
| Founded | 2020 | Originally launched pre-2020, acquired by Overwolf in 2020 |
| Open source | Platform code and rewards system published openly | Proprietary, commercially operated |
| Creator revenue split | 75% of ad revenue to creators, 25% to Modrinth | Roughly 70% reported for relevant ad/reward revenue, program-dependent |
| API access | Public, documented, 300 requests/minute per IP | Controlled by Overwolf terms, quota-based, licensing required past quota |
| Catalog size (2026, third-party estimate) | Over 100,000 projects reported | Larger legacy catalog; no single verified current total published |
| Primary launcher | Modrinth App | CurseForge App / Overwolf App |
| Third-party launcher support | Prism Launcher, ATLauncher, others via open API | Prism Launcher (direct downloads after later Overwolf agreement), approved integrations |
| Mod loader coverage | Fabric, Forge, NeoForge, Quilt | Fabric, Forge, NeoForge, Quilt (project-dependent) |
| Mobile app | No dedicated official mobile mod-manager | No dedicated official mobile mod-manager |
| Payout basis | Project-page views and in-app downloads | Varies by program and revenue category |
| Ad-revenue payout cadence | Net-60-day | Not uniformly published |
| Network-wide user metric | No comparable public figure available | 113 million MAU (Overwolf network-wide, not Minecraft-only) |
A brief history: how modding ended up split across two platforms
CurseForge’s roots stretch back to the early 2010s, when it operated as a general-purpose gaming content hub spanning Minecraft, World of Warcraft add-ons, and other moddable titles. For most of that decade it had no serious rival in Minecraft specifically, which is why so many long-running modpacks and individual mods built their entire download infrastructure around it. Twitch owned CurseForge for a stretch before Overwolf acquired the platform in 2020, folding it into Overwolf’s broader creator-monetization and in-game-overlay business.
Modrinth entered the picture in that same year, 2020, built from scratch as a modern alternative rather than an acquisition of an existing property. Its founders designed the platform around three explicit commitments: open-source code, a public API from day one, and a creator-payout formula that would not change behind closed doors. For its first couple of years, Modrinth was a smaller, enthusiast-favored alternative rather than a mainstream default.
That changed in 2023, when CurseForge’s Terms of Service update over AI-training language triggered the migration wave described below. The controversy did more to grow Modrinth’s creator base in a few months than its first three years combined, according to community accounts from that period, and it cemented the current landscape: two competing, actively maintained platforms rather than one dominant incumbent with a token alternative. By 2026, that two-platform reality is settled enough that most serious mod authors plan for dual-hosting from the start rather than treating it as an afterthought.
What Modrinth is and why it exists
Modrinth launched in 2020 as a direct response to frustration with the existing mod-hosting landscape. It built its reputation on three pillars: an open-source codebase, a public and well-documented API, and a revenue-sharing model that creators could actually read and verify. The platform’s rewards documentation states plainly that its revenue-distribution system is open source, which is a meaningfully different stance from most commercial content platforms that treat payout algorithms as proprietary.
Modrinth is not structured as a nonprofit, and it was not built through the kind of acquisition that shaped CurseForge’s recent history, although Cake Hosting reports that in February 2026 Modrinth became part of Spark Universe. Funding has come through a mix of advertising, sponsorships, donations, and its creator monetization program rather than a single corporate parent dictating platform direction. That independence is central to how Modrinth markets itself to mod authors who want predictable terms and a platform that will not suddenly change its data-usage policy without warning.
The practical result is a cleaner, faster-feeling site built around tagging, loader filters, and version compatibility. Mod authors who upload to Modrinth get automatic eligibility for monetization the moment they publish a project, though withdrawing money requires completing payment details separately. For players, project pages read like a more structured product listing: supported Minecraft versions, loaders, dependencies, and changelogs are consistently formatted across the catalog, which the open API makes easy for third-party tools like Prism Launcher to parse and surface directly inside a modpack browser.
What CurseForge is and how Overwolf changed it
CurseForge predates Modrinth by a wide margin and carries the institutional weight of being the default mod repository for most of the 2010s. Overwolf, the Israeli gaming-platform company better known for in-game overlays and streaming tools, acquired CurseForge from Twitch in 2020 and folded it into a much larger creator-monetization network. That network, by Overwolf’s own 2026 figures, spans more than 1,500 games, 178,000 in-game creators, and 33 billion downloads a year, with 113 million monthly active users across the entire ecosystem.
Those numbers describe Overwolf’s whole business, not CurseForge’s Minecraft vertical specifically, and no authoritative source in current reporting isolates a Minecraft-only monthly active user figure for CurseForge. What is clear is that CurseForge retained the deeper legacy catalog, particularly for Forge-based mods and long-running modpacks that built their communities before Modrinth existed. Large, established packs like Feed The Beast and various All the Mods releases grew up on CurseForge’s infrastructure, and many of them still treat it as a primary or equal distribution channel even as they publish to Modrinth as well.
CurseForge’s API access sits behind Overwolf’s commercial terms. Third-party applications need authorization, Overwolf can impose usage quotas, and exceeding those quotas can require a separate written licensing agreement or result in denied access. That is a fundamentally different posture from Modrinth’s open-by-default API, and it shaped years of friction between CurseForge and independent, open-source launchers before Prism Launcher secured a later arrangement allowing direct CurseForge downloads.
How CurseForge Is Widening Its Reach Beyond Minecraft Mods
CurseForge is no longer only a Minecraft story. According to the CurseForge September newsletter, CurseForge mod support went live for RuneScape: Dragonwilds alongside that game’s 1.0 release. For a Minecraft-only player this changes little in daily use, but it shows that the platform’s priorities now extend across several games.
Community programs follow the same pattern. The newsletter says Minecraft ModJam 2026, “Echoes of the Past,” wrapped up with winners across Mods, Resource Packs, Data Packs, and Bedrock Add-Ons, with a theme of ancient artifacts and legendary creatures. Over in PUBG: BATTLEGROUNDS, the UGC Contest wrapped with $95,000 shared across winners for player-created custom modes. The same newsletter describes a modding contest with $10,000 in prizes for 23 winners: 10 Grand Prize winners at $600 each, 10 Mid-Contest Reward winners at $100 each, and 3 Community Favorite winners at $1,000 each.
The app has also gained features aimed squarely at Minecraft players, including a Skins tab added in May 2026, according to the CurseForge blog. For mod authors, the practical step is to check whether a contest or game program matches the kind of project they publish before assuming the same rules apply across every game on the platform, and to read each program’s own terms before counting on a prize or payout.
The 2023 Terms of Service controversy that split the modding community
No comparison of these two platforms is complete without the 2023 episode that still shapes creator behavior in 2026. CurseForge updated or clarified terms that many Minecraft mod authors read as granting Overwolf unusually broad rights over uploaded content, including language that creators worried could cover machine-learning or AI-training use of their files, metadata, and descriptions.
The backlash was immediate and loud across modding forums and Discord servers. Authors were uncertain whether they could meaningfully opt out of the broader licensing language, and the wording struck many as going well beyond what a conventional mod-hosting agreement should require. The documented fact is straightforward: the 2023 terms caused substantial community controversy centered on AI-training and content-usage concerns. What followed is more a matter of interpretation than settled record — some projects shifted their primary downloads to Modrinth, others began dual-hosting as a hedge, and community sentiment broadly credited Modrinth’s open governance model as the safer long-term home for creative work.
The migration was never total. CurseForge kept enough reach, launcher integration, and legacy audience that most large modpacks concluded abandoning it outright would cost more in visibility than the controversy was worth. The more common outcome, three years on, is dual-hosting: publish to CurseForge for discovery and app reach, publish to Modrinth for open API access and the creator base that moved there on principle.
Creator monetization: 75% vs a program-dependent split
Money is where the two platforms diverge most concretely. Modrinth’s Creator Monetization Program is published and specific: creators receive 75% of advertising revenue, Modrinth keeps 25%, and payouts are calculated from a combination of project-page views and in-app downloads. Modrinth pays out on a net-60-day basis, and user-profile data is explicitly excluded from the payout calculation, which the platform frames as a privacy commitment as much as a monetization detail. In July 2025, Modrinth reportedly disclosed $227,000 in revenue for June, of which $170,000 went to creators, according to Dataintelo.
CurseForge’s picture is more layered. Overwolf’s official CurseForge listing says mod authors get 70% of all ad revenue in the CurseForge app and website, but that number is not presented as a single universal rate across every revenue stream the way Modrinth’s 75% is. Overwolf runs different reward structures for different revenue streams and content types, so a mod author’s actual take can vary depending on which program applies to their specific project. For a comparison article, the honest framing is that Modrinth offers a transparent, single-number deal, while CurseForge offers a larger potential audience with a stated 70% ad-revenue share and less uniform payout math elsewhere.
| Monetization factor | Modrinth | CurseForge / Overwolf |
|---|---|---|
| Published creator share | 75% of ad revenue | ~70% reported for applicable reward revenue (varies by program) |
| Platform share | 25% | Varies |
| Payout basis | Project-page views + in-app downloads | Program-dependent |
| Payout cadence | Net-60 days | Not uniformly published |
| Enrollment | Automatic eligibility on upload; payment details required to withdraw | Enrollment through Overwolf creator program terms |
| Transparency of formula | Open-source revenue-distribution code | Not published as open source |
How CurseForge Premium Mod Splits Differ From Ad Revenue
CurseForge’s ad-revenue share is only one of its payout models. Its support documentation for ARK: Survival Ascended Premium Mods lists the available tiers as $2 / $5 / $10 / $15, and the page shows a modified date of Thu, 1 Oct, 2026. On PC, 50% of the revenue goes to the mod author, 25% goes to Studio Wildcard, 5% goes to Tebex, and the remains (~20%) goes to CurseForge.
On Xbox and PlayStation, the documented split gives 50% to the author, 25% to Studio Wildcard, and 25% to CurseForge, with platform fees of 30% before the revshare. In case of a refund, the money is deducted from the author’s monthly payout according to the same revshare (i.e. 50% of the refund), and refunds are managed by the payment processors.
These figures describe ARK premium content, not Minecraft mods, so they should not be read as the rate for a typical Minecraft project. They do show why a single CurseForge percentage is hard to quote: the 70% ad-revenue statement and the 50% premium-mod author share come from different programs. Before comparing payouts with Modrinth’s 75%, check which CurseForge program actually applies to your project and what deductions come before the author’s share.
Benchmarks: what multiple sources actually say about scale
Any “which platform is bigger” claim needs more than one source, because Modrinth and CurseForge do not publish numbers on the same schedule or using the same definitions. Pulling from third-party platform comparisons, Overwolf’s own corporate disclosures, and the platforms’ respective public documentation gives a clearer, triangulated picture than relying on any single figure.
| Source | Claim | Platform it describes |
|---|---|---|
| Third-party 2026 platform comparison reporting | Over 100,000 total projects (mods, modpacks, resource packs, shaders combined) | Modrinth |
| Overwolf corporate figures (2026) | 113 million monthly active users, 33 billion downloads a year, 178,000 in-game creators, 1,500+ supported games | CurseForge’s parent company, network-wide (not Minecraft-isolated) |
| Modrinth’s own API and rewards documentation | 300 requests/minute public API limit; 75% creator revenue share; net-60-day payout cycle | Modrinth (self-published, verifiable against live docs) |
| Overwolf’s third-party API terms documentation | Quota-based access; additional written licensing required past assigned quota | CurseForge (self-published, verifiable against live docs) |
Notice what is missing from that table: a verified, Minecraft-specific monthly active user count for CurseForge, and a verified, platform-wide monthly active user count for Modrinth. Both platforms are large enough to matter to millions of players, but neither has published the kind of audited, directly comparable usage metric that would let anyone state a precise winner by raw traffic. Articles and forum posts that claim an exact percentage split of “Modrinth users vs CurseForge users” are almost always extrapolating from incomplete data, and this comparison intentionally avoids repeating that error.
Catalog size: counting mods is harder than it sounds
Both platforms resist a clean head-to-head catalog number, mostly because “project” means different things on each site. A project can be a single mod, a full modpack bundling dozens of mods, a resource pack, a shader pack, or a plugin, and neither platform publishes a verified breakdown by category that lines up with the other’s methodology.
What third-party 2026 reporting does establish: Modrinth has surpassed roughly 100,000 total projects, a figure cited in multiple comparison sources even though it is not an official Modrinth-published metric. CurseForge’s total is not published as an audited figure, but it reportedly hosted 226,000 projects in July 2026 versus Modrinth’s 100,000-plus, and its older launch date and larger historical install base make it reasonable to describe as the bigger overall catalog, particularly for Forge-based mods that predate Modrinth’s existence. Treat any specific CurseForge total you see, including that one, as an estimate until Overwolf publishes an audited figure.
The more useful comparison for most players is not raw count but composition. Modrinth’s catalog skews heavily toward Fabric, Quilt, and newer NeoForge content, along with performance-focused client-side mods that became popular after 2020. CurseForge’s catalog carries more legacy Forge depth, simply because it has been collecting Forge mods for longer. Anyone modding an older Minecraft version with an established Forge-based pack will likely find more options on CurseForge; anyone building a modern, performance-tuned Fabric setup will likely find a richer, more current selection on Modrinth.
API access and why it matters for launchers
The API gap is the most consequential technical difference between the two platforms, because it determines what third-party tools can build on top of each one. Modrinth’s API is public, documented, and rate-limited at 300 requests per minute per IP address, whether or not the request includes an authentication token. Rate-limit status is exposed through standard response headers, which makes it straightforward for a launcher developer to build around the limit without guessing.
# Example: querying the Modrinth API for a project search
curl -s "https://api.modrinth.com/v2/search?query=sodium&limit=5" \
-H "User-Agent: example-app/1.0 ([email protected])"
# Response headers include:
# X-Ratelimit-Limit: 300
# X-Ratelimit-Remaining: 299
# X-Ratelimit-Reset: 60CurseForge’s API sits behind a different model entirely. Overwolf’s third-party API terms require authorization for external applications, allow Overwolf to impose usage quotas at its discretion, and state that exceeding an assigned quota may require negotiating a separate written licensing agreement — with no guarantee that agreement will be reached. That approval-gated structure is precisely what caused years of friction with open-source launcher projects, since a volunteer-run tool cannot always clear a commercial licensing process the way a funded company can.
Prism Launcher’s current ability to pull CurseForge content directly is the result of a later arrangement with Overwolf, not the default state of affairs. That history is worth remembering: Modrinth’s openness was a design choice from day one, while CurseForge’s third-party access has been negotiated project by project.
Launcher support: Modrinth App, Prism Launcher, and the CurseForge App
Both platforms ship a first-party desktop client. The Modrinth App handles instance creation, mod installation, and updates while staying tied to Modrinth’s open API underneath. The CurseForge App (and the broader Overwolf App it sits inside) does the same job for CurseForge’s catalog, with the added weight of Overwolf’s wider in-game overlay and creator ecosystem bundled alongside it. CurseForge App 1.324, reportedly released on October 18, 2026, added Java-environment-variable controls for Minecraft, reduced idle CPU use, and fixed Apple Silicon modpack installation, skins, window sizing, and favorites.
For players who want to avoid installing either company’s full client, third-party launchers are where the API gap becomes visible day to day. Prism Launcher and ATLauncher both integrate with Modrinth natively through its open API, and Prism Launcher can also pull CurseForge content directly following its negotiated access. That makes Prism Launcher the most flexible option for anyone who wants a single tool that reaches both catalogs without juggling two separate apps.
- Modrinth App — official client, Modrinth catalog only
- Prism Launcher — open-source, supports both Modrinth and CurseForge
- ATLauncher — supports Modrinth and curated modpacks
- CurseForge App / Overwolf App — official client, CurseForge catalog, bundled overlay tools
Mod loader compatibility: Fabric, Forge, NeoForge, Quilt
Loader support is one area where the platforms are functionally equal on paper. Both Modrinth and CurseForge host content for Fabric, Forge, NeoForge, and Quilt, and neither platform restricts uploads to a single loader ecosystem. The real difference shows up at the project level rather than the platform level: individual mods and modpacks typically support one loader, or occasionally two, rather than all four, and which loader dominates a given platform’s catalog reflects the community that built up there rather than a technical limitation.
| Loader | Modrinth support | CurseForge support | Typical catalog strength |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fabric | Yes | Yes | Strong on Modrinth |
| Forge | Yes | Yes | Strong on CurseForge (legacy depth) |
| NeoForge | Yes | Yes | Growing on both, newer on Modrinth |
| Quilt | Yes | Project-dependent | Stronger on Modrinth |
Practically, this means the loader you plan to use should influence which platform you search first, not which platform you commit to exclusively. A Fabric-first modded playthrough will usually turn up more current options starting on Modrinth. A long-running Forge pack built around an older Minecraft version will usually turn up more options starting on CurseForge.
Search, discovery, and moderation in practice
Beyond raw numbers, the day-to-day experience of searching for a mod differs noticeably between the two sites. Modrinth’s search interface leans on structured filters: Minecraft version, loader, category, and environment (client-side, server-side, or both) are all first-class filter options, and the uniform project-page format means a search result almost always tells you immediately whether a mod fits your setup. That structure is a direct byproduct of the platform’s open API design — because external tools need machine-readable metadata, Modrinth’s own search benefits from the same consistency.
CurseForge’s search and browse experience carries more legacy inconsistency, a natural result of absorbing years of uploads from a less standardized era of Minecraft modding. Older projects may lack the same granular version and loader tagging that newer uploads include, which means search results can require more manual checking of a mod’s description or changelog to confirm compatibility. This is not a defect so much as the cost of a longer history; a platform that has been collecting content since the early 2010s will always carry more inconsistent legacy metadata than one that launched in 2020 with modern tagging built in from day one.
On moderation, both platforms run file-scanning and review processes, and both rely partly on community reporting to catch malicious or broken uploads. Modrinth’s smaller, newer catalog is easier to audit end-to-end, while CurseForge’s scale means Overwolf leans more heavily on automated scanning and launcher-level safeguards. Neither approach is foolproof. Security researchers and modding communities have documented malware incidents tied to mod-hosting platforms in the broader ecosystem over the years, which is why the standard advice — check download counts, read recent comments, verify the author’s other projects, and avoid mods with no version history — applies equally on both sites.
Real-world examples: five modpacks and where they live
Abstract platform comparisons only go so far. Here is how the Modrinth-versus-CurseForge split plays out across five recognizable types of Minecraft content that players actually install.
- Feed The Beast-branded packs: one of the longest-running modpack brands in Minecraft, built up on CurseForge’s infrastructure over more than a decade. Its deep Forge-based legacy roots mean it remains closely tied to CurseForge’s catalog, even as individual component mods inside FTB packs increasingly appear on Modrinth as well.
- All the Mods series: a large, actively maintained Forge/NeoForge modpack family that, per current reporting, continues to treat CurseForge as a core distribution channel while also maintaining a presence on Modrinth for players and tools that prefer the open API.
- Fabric-based performance and optimization mods (the kind bundled into “lightweight” client packs): this category skews toward Modrinth first, since Fabric’s lighter, more modular mod ecosystem grew up alongside Modrinth’s 2020-era launch and shares much of the same community.
- Resource packs and shader packs: both platforms host these natively, but Modrinth’s cleaner tagging for supported versions makes it a common first stop for players hunting for a shader pack compatible with a specific Minecraft release.
- New independent mods from first-time authors: a growing share of new creators default to publishing on Modrinth first because of the transparent 75% revenue share and instant monetization eligibility, then add a CurseForge listing afterward if the project gains traction and justifies the dual-hosting effort.
The pattern across all five examples is the same: age and loader lineage predict platform affinity better than any single feature. Older, Forge-rooted, high-profile packs skew CurseForge. Newer, Fabric-rooted, or creator-economics-conscious projects skew Modrinth. Very few popular projects in 2026 are exclusive to one platform by policy; most dual-host and let players pick whichever site their launcher of choice talks to.
Pricing and cost comparison
Neither platform charges players to download mods, and neither charges mod authors to upload them. The “pricing” that actually matters here is the revenue each platform keeps from advertising shown around a creator’s project, since that is the only money changing hands in this ecosystem for most individual mod authors.
| Cost / revenue item | Modrinth | CurseForge / Overwolf |
|---|---|---|
| Cost to players (download) | $0 | $0 |
| Cost to upload a mod | $0 | $0 |
| Platform cut of ad revenue | 25% | ~30% (varies by program) |
| Creator cut of ad revenue | 75% | ~70% (varies by program) |
| API access for independent developers | Free, public, rate-limited | Requires Overwolf authorization; may require paid licensing past quota |
| Premium/ad-free tier for players | Not a core part of the published model in current documentation | Bundled within Overwolf’s wider in-app ecosystem |
For a solo mod author with a modest-but-steady download count, the 5-percentage-point gap between 75% and roughly 70% is unlikely to change their life, but it compounds for high-traffic projects. A modpack generating meaningful ad impressions every month will see that 5-point difference turn into real dollars over a year, which is part of why Modrinth’s transparent split has become a selling point in creator communities even beyond the 2023 controversy.
To make that gap concrete: if a modpack’s ad placements generated a hypothetical $1,000 in a given month, Modrinth’s published 75/25 split would return $750 to the creator and keep $250 for the platform. Under a CurseForge-style 70/30 arrangement, the same $1,000 would return roughly $700 to the creator and $300 to the platform — a $50 difference on that one month alone, scaling linearly with traffic. This is illustrative math based on the published and commonly reported percentages, not a real revenue report from either company, but it shows why high-traffic modpack teams pay close attention to which platform is driving the bulk of their downloads rather than treating the two as interchangeable.
Real-world use cases: who should pick which platform
Five scenarios cover most of the decisions players and creators actually face:
- New Fabric-based performance mod author: publish to Modrinth first. The catalog skews Fabric-heavy, the API makes it trivial for Prism Launcher and other tools to surface your project immediately, and the 75% split is clear from day one.
- Maintainer of a long-running Forge modpack built before 2020: keep CurseForge as a primary channel. The existing audience, launcher familiarity, and legacy version support are concentrated there, and migrating away risks losing discovery traffic built up over years.
- Player installing an older, Forge-heavy pack like a classic Feed The Beast release: search CurseForge first; that is where the deepest legacy catalog for older Minecraft versions still lives.
- Player who wants one launcher for everything: use Prism Launcher, which pulls from both Modrinth and CurseForge, avoiding the need to run two separate official apps.
- Developer building a third-party tool, bot, or mod manager: build against Modrinth’s API first. The open, documented, 300-requests-per-minute access removes the approval bottleneck that CurseForge’s quota-and-licensing model imposes on independent projects.
Migration guide: moving a mod or modpack between platforms
Mod authors weighing a full or partial move, and players who simply want to switch where they source content, can follow this sequence.
- Decide whether this is a migration or a dual-host. Most large projects dual-host rather than abandon either platform outright, since each one reaches a different slice of the audience.
- On Modrinth, create an account and a new project page, filling in supported Minecraft versions, loaders, and a changelog in the same structured format players expect from the platform.
- Enroll in the Creator Monetization Program if you plan to earn from ad revenue; eligibility is automatic on upload, but you must add payment details separately to withdraw funds.
- Re-upload your existing release files (jars, resource packs, or modpack manifests) to the new Modrinth project, matching version numbers to your CurseForge releases to avoid confusing players tracking both pages.
- Update your mod’s in-game description, GitHub readme, and any Discord or wiki links to point to both download pages rather than removing the CurseForge link outright, unless you have a specific reason to cut ties entirely.
- If you maintain a CurseForge presence, review your current Overwolf creator-program terms rather than assuming the 2023 language is still in force unchanged; verify directly against your current author agreement.
- For players switching tools rather than authors switching platforms, install Prism Launcher or ATLauncher, which can browse and install from Modrinth (and, for Prism, CurseForge) without requiring two separate official apps.
- Test the migrated or dual-hosted mod in a clean instance on both platforms’ launchers before announcing the change publicly, since loader version mismatches are the most common post-migration bug report.
Pros and cons: Modrinth
Pros: transparent 75/25 revenue split with published, open-source payout code; public API with clear, documented rate limits; strong Fabric, Quilt, and NeoForge catalog; fast automatic monetization eligibility; net-60-day payout cadence that is clearly stated upfront.
Cons: smaller overall catalog than CurseForge’s legacy depth, particularly for older Forge-based content; no official mobile app; younger platform with a shorter track record for very old Minecraft versions; no independently audited public user-base figure to compare against CurseForge’s network-wide numbers.
Pros and cons: CurseForge
Pros: larger, older catalog with the deepest Forge-based legacy coverage; backed by Overwolf’s established infrastructure and reported 113 million monthly active users network-wide; strong default discovery for long-running, high-profile modpacks; mature review and moderation processes built over a longer operating history.
Cons: API access gated behind Overwolf authorization and quotas, with potential licensing requirements past those quotas; payout percentage that varies by program (70% of ad revenue in the app and website, but different splits elsewhere) rather than one transparent figure the way Modrinth’s is; lingering community distrust from the 2023 Terms of Service controversy over AI-training language; no open-source transparency into how its monetization formula works.
Verdict: which platform wins in 2026
There is no single winner here, and the data does not support pretending otherwise. If the comparison is reduced to transparency and creator economics, Modrinth wins clearly: a published 75% revenue share, an open API capped at a known 300 requests per minute, and open-source payout code beat CurseForge’s less legible, program-dependent terms on every axis that favors independent mod authors and third-party developers.
If the comparison is reduced to raw catalog depth and discovery for older, Forge-based content, CurseForge still wins, because it has been collecting mods for longer and carries Overwolf’s commercial reach behind it. Overwolf’s own network-wide figures — 113 million monthly active users, 33 billion yearly downloads, 178,000 creators across 1,500-plus games — dwarf anything Modrinth has published, even accounting for the fact that those numbers span far more than just Minecraft.
The realistic 2026 recommendation for most mod authors is dual-hosting: publish to Modrinth for the transparent split and open API, and keep a CurseForge listing for the audience and legacy reach that still lives there. For players, the recommendation is simpler — use a launcher like Prism Launcher that reaches both catalogs, and let the specific mod or modpack you want dictate which platform you search first rather than picking a side permanently.
What should not survive this comparison is the instinct to treat either platform as categorically unsafe or obsolete. CurseForge’s 2023 controversy was real and consequential, but it did not erase the platform’s catalog depth or Overwolf’s infrastructure investment. Modrinth’s open-source credentials are real and consequential too, but the platform is still younger and smaller than its rival by most available measures. Readers choosing between the two in October 2026 are better served by matching the platform to the specific mod loader and modpack lineage they need than by picking a permanent allegiance based on reputation alone.
Frequently asked questions
Is Modrinth safer to use than CurseForge?
Both platforms run moderation and file-scanning processes, and neither guarantees every uploaded project is risk-free. Modrinth’s open-source approach gives outside developers more visibility into how the platform works, while CurseForge benefits from a longer operating history and Overwolf’s established security infrastructure. Users on either platform should still check an author’s reputation, release history, and permissions before installing anything.
Does CurseForge still have AI-training rights over uploaded mods?
The 2023 controversy centered on terms that many modders read as granting broad content-usage rights, potentially including AI or machine-learning training. There is no authoritative, current public record confirming the exact final legal interpretation of that language. Mod authors concerned about this should read CurseForge’s current author agreement directly rather than relying on 2023-era community discussion.
Can I use one launcher for both Modrinth and CurseForge mods?
Yes. Prism Launcher supports both platforms — native integration with Modrinth through its open API, and direct CurseForge downloads following a later arrangement with Overwolf. This avoids running two separate official apps for a single modded Minecraft setup.
Which platform pays mod authors more?
Modrinth publishes a clear 75% creator share of advertising revenue. CurseForge/Overwolf figures commonly cited in third-party reporting sit closer to 70% for relevant reward revenue, but the exact rate depends on which Overwolf program and revenue category applies, so it is not a single universal number the way Modrinth’s is.
Does Modrinth or CurseForge have more mods?
Modrinth has surpassed roughly 100,000 projects according to third-party 2026 reporting, though that figure is not an official Modrinth-published metric. CurseForge is generally regarded as having a larger overall catalog due to its longer operating history, especially for older Forge-based mods, but no authoritative current total has been published for direct comparison.
Do Modrinth and CurseForge support the same mod loaders?
Both platforms host content for Fabric, Forge, NeoForge, and Quilt. Modrinth’s catalog skews toward Fabric, Quilt, and newer NeoForge content, while CurseForge retains deeper coverage of older Forge-based mods and modpacks, since it has existed longer.
Is it free to upload mods to either platform?
Yes, uploading and downloading are free on both Modrinth and CurseForge. The only money involved is the advertising revenue each platform shares back with creators, split 75/25 on Modrinth and at a program-dependent rate, commonly cited near 70/30, on CurseForge.
Why did some modders move away from CurseForge in 2023?
CurseForge updated its terms in 2023 in a way that many Minecraft mod authors interpreted as granting Overwolf unusually broad rights over uploaded content, including concerns about AI-training use of files and metadata. The backlash pushed a share of creators to prioritize or move to Modrinth, though the shift was never total, and many large projects now publish to both platforms.
