AudiobookshelfvsOperant
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| Audiobookshelf | Operant | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 79/100 | 39/100 |
| Rank in category | #1 of 15 in Audiobook Management | #170 of 209 in AI Agents |
| GitHub stars | 14 839 | 447 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +419 | — |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 14 | 1 |
| Latest release | v2.37.2 · 23 Oct 2026 | desktop-candidate-2026-09-28-08e65ea · 28 Sept 2026 |
| Setup | Easy | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | Yes | No |
| License | GPL-3.0 | Other |
| Main language | JavaScript | Python |
Which one should you pick?
Audiobookshelf scores 79/100 against 39/100 for Operant, so it is the safer default.
Audiobookshelf ships more often: 14 stable releases in the past year, against 1 for Operant.
If you want the quickest setup, Audiobookshelf is easier to run; Operant needs more configuration.
Audiobookshelf is growing faster right now (+419 stars in 30 days).
Audiobookshelf details →Operant details →
Swap a project
Keep Audiobookshelf, compare it with
Keep Operant, compare it with