ChronoFramevsNomad
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| ChronoFrame | Nomad | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 63/100 | 76/100 |
| Rank in category | #8 of 41 in Photo Management | #2 of 11 in Container Orchestration |
| GitHub stars | 1 964 | 17 047 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +32 | +78 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 3 | 17 |
| Latest release | v1.0.2 · 21 Oct 2026 | v2.1.0 · 28 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Easy | Moderate |
| Official Docker image | Yes | No |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | Other |
| Main language | Typescript | Go |
Which one should you pick?
Nomad scores 76/100 against 63/100 for ChronoFrame, so it is the safer default.
Nomad ships more often: 17 stable releases in the past year, against 3 for ChronoFrame.
If you want the quickest setup, ChronoFrame is easier to run; Nomad needs more configuration.
Nomad is growing faster right now (+78 stars in 30 days).
ChronoFrame details →Nomad details →
Swap a project
Keep ChronoFrame, compare it with
Keep Nomad, compare it with