# ChronoFrame vs pikvm

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

| | ChronoFrame | pikvm |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 63/100 | 72/100 ✓ |
| Rank in category | #8 of 41 in Photo Management | #3 of 23 in Remote Access |
| GitHub stars | 1 964 | 10 424 ✓ |
| Stars, last 30 days | +32 | +66 ✓ |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 3 ✓ | 0 |
| Latest release | v1.0.2 · 21 Oct 2026 | — |
| Setup | Easy ✓ | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | Yes ✓ | No |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | GPL-3.0 |
| Main language | Typescript | — |

## Which one should you pick?

pikvm scores 72/100 against 63/100 for ChronoFrame, so it is the safer default.

ChronoFrame ships more often: 3 stable releases in the past year, against 0 for pikvm.

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

pikvm is growing faster right now (+66 stars in 30 days).

## Details

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

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