ActivityWatchvsWorld Monitor
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| ActivityWatch | World Monitor | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 80/100 | 86/100 |
| Rank in category | #1 of 11 in Time Tracking | #5 of 104 in Monitoring & observability |
| GitHub stars | 19 417 | 89 727 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +441 | +2 388 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 13 | 17 |
| Latest release | v0.14.1 · 10 Oct 2026 | v2.11.6 · 25 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | No | No |
| License | MPL-2.0 | AGPL-3.0 |
| Main language | Python | Typescript |
Which one should you pick?
World Monitor scores 86/100 against 80/100 for ActivityWatch, so it is the safer default.
World Monitor ships more often: 17 stable releases in the past year, against 13 for ActivityWatch.
If you want the quickest setup, ActivityWatch is easier to run; World Monitor needs more configuration.
World Monitor is growing faster right now (+2 388 stars in 30 days).
ActivityWatch details →World Monitor details →
Swap a project
Keep ActivityWatch, compare it with
Keep World Monitor, compare it with