# apitable vs qm-music

> Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.

| | apitable | qm-music |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 65/100 ✓ | 51/100 |
| Rank in category | #4 of 17 in Low Code | #20 of 59 in Music Streaming |
| GitHub stars | 15 654 ✓ | 589 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +35 ✓ | +1 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 0 | 11 ✓ |
| Latest release | — | v2.5.0 · 10 Sept 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Easy ✓ |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | Apache-2.0 |
| Main language | Typescript | Java |

## Which one should you pick?

apitable scores 65/100 against 51/100 for qm-music, so it is the safer default.

qm-music ships more often: 11 stable releases in the past year, against 0 for apitable.

If you want the quickest setup, qm-music is easier to run; apitable needs more configuration.

apitable is growing faster right now (+35 stars in 30 days).

## Details

- [apitable](https://selfhost.directory/project/apitable) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/apitable.md)
- [qm-music](https://selfhost.directory/project/qm-music) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/qm-music.md)

---
Source: https://selfhost.directory/compare/apitable-vs-qm-music