BLE MonitorvsHyperSwitch
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| BLE Monitor | HyperSwitch | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 60/100 | 81/100 |
| Rank in category | #1 of 3 in Integration | #2 of 9 in Fintech |
| GitHub stars | 2 251 | 45 432 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +7 | +1 602 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 13 | 2 |
| Latest release | 14.4.0 · 23 Oct 2026 | v1.127.0 · 23 Sept 2026 |
| Setup | Easy | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | No | Yes |
| License | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| Main language | Python | Rust |
Which one should you pick?
HyperSwitch scores 81/100 against 60/100 for BLE Monitor, so it is the safer default.
BLE Monitor ships more often: 13 stable releases in the past year, against 2 for HyperSwitch.
If you want the quickest setup, BLE Monitor is easier to run; HyperSwitch needs more configuration.
HyperSwitch is growing faster right now (+1 602 stars in 30 days).
BLE Monitor details →HyperSwitch details →