ChronoFramevsOTOBO
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| ChronoFrame | OTOBO | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 63/100 | 54/100 |
| Rank in category | #8 of 41 in Photo Management | #5 of 9 in Helpdesk |
| GitHub stars | 1 964 | 340 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +32 | +2 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 3 | 2 |
| Latest release | v1.0.2 · 21 Oct 2026 | rel-11_0_15 · 4 Feb 2026 |
| Setup | Easy | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | GPL-3.0 |
| Main language | Typescript | Perl |
Which one should you pick?
ChronoFrame scores 63/100 against 54/100 for OTOBO, so it is the safer default.
ChronoFrame ships more often: 3 stable releases in the past year, against 2 for OTOBO.
If you want the quickest setup, ChronoFrame is easier to run; OTOBO needs more configuration.
ChronoFrame is growing faster right now (+32 stars in 30 days).
ChronoFrame details →OTOBO details →
Swap a project
Keep ChronoFrame, compare it with
Keep OTOBO, compare it with