ChronoFramevsIPFS Web UI
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| ChronoFrame | IPFS Web UI | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 63/100 | 60/100 |
| Rank in category | #8 of 41 in Photo Management | #12 of 27 in File Sharing & Collaboration |
| GitHub stars | 1 964 | 1 636 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +32 | — |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 3 | 6 |
| Latest release | v1.0.2 · 21 Oct 2026 | v4.13.0 · 18 Sept 2026 |
| Setup | Easy | Easy |
| Official Docker image | Yes | No |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Main language | Typescript | JavaScript |
Which one should you pick?
ChronoFrame scores 63/100 against 60/100 for IPFS Web UI, so it is the safer default.
IPFS Web UI ships more often: 6 stable releases in the past year, against 3 for ChronoFrame.
ChronoFrame is growing faster right now (+32 stars in 30 days).
ChronoFrame details →IPFS Web UI details →
Swap a project
Keep ChronoFrame, compare it with
Keep IPFS Web UI, compare it with