ActivityWatchvstrigger
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| ActivityWatch | trigger | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 80/100 | 76/100 |
| Rank in category | #1 of 11 in Time Tracking | #7 of 32 in Workflow Automation |
| GitHub stars | 19 418 | 16 649 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +442 | +250 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 13 | 49 |
| Latest release | v0.14.1 · 10 Oct 2026 | v4.8.1 · 23 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | No | Yes |
| License | MPL-2.0 | Apache-2.0 |
| Main language | Python | Typescript |
Which one should you pick?
ActivityWatch scores 80/100 against 76/100 for trigger, so it is the safer default.
trigger ships more often: 49 stable releases in the past year, against 13 for ActivityWatch.
If you want the quickest setup, ActivityWatch is easier to run; trigger needs more configuration.
ActivityWatch details →trigger details →
Swap a project
Keep ActivityWatch, compare it with
Keep trigger, compare it with