# bookwyrm vs Concat

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

| | bookwyrm | Concat |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 58/100 | 82/100 ✓ |
| Rank in category | #26 of 69 in Social Networks & Forums | #1 of 18 in Video Processing |
| GitHub stars | 2 807 | 12 478 ✓ |
| Stars, last 30 days | +21 | +2 479 ✓ |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 11 ✓ | 6 |
| Latest release | v0.9.3 · 9 Sept 2026 | v0.2.8 · 20 Oct 2026 ✓ |
| Setup | Advanced | Easy ✓ |
| Official Docker image | No | No |
| License | Other | AGPL-3.0 |
| Main language | Python | Rust |

## Which one should you pick?

Concat scores 82/100 against 58/100 for bookwyrm, so it is the safer default.

bookwyrm ships more often: 11 stable releases in the past year, against 6 for Concat.

If you want the quickest setup, Concat is easier to run; bookwyrm needs more configuration.

Concat is growing faster right now (+2 479 stars in 30 days).

## Details

- [bookwyrm](https://selfhost.directory/project/bookwyrm) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/bookwyrm.md)
- [Concat](https://selfhost.directory/project/concat) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/concat.md)

---
Source: https://selfhost.directory/compare/bookwyrm-vs-concat