# ChronoFrame vs Mastodon

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

| | ChronoFrame | Mastodon |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 63/100 | 82/100 ✓ |
| Rank in category | #8 of 41 in Photo Management | #2 of 69 in Social Networks & Forums |
| GitHub stars | 1 964 | 50 458 ✓ |
| Stars, last 30 days | +32 | +139 ✓ |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 3 | 38 ✓ |
| Latest release | v1.0.2 · 21 Oct 2026 ✓ | v4.4.26 · 1 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Easy ✓ | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | AGPL-3.0 |
| Main language | Typescript | Ruby |

## Which one should you pick?

Mastodon scores 82/100 against 63/100 for ChronoFrame, so it is the safer default.

Mastodon ships more often: 38 stable releases in the past year, against 3 for ChronoFrame.

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

Mastodon is growing faster right now (+139 stars in 30 days).

## Details

- [ChronoFrame](https://selfhost.directory/project/chronoframe) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/chronoframe.md)
- [Mastodon](https://selfhost.directory/project/mastodon) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/mastodon.md)

---
Source: https://selfhost.directory/compare/chronoframe-vs-mastodon