ChronoFramevsPulse
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| ChronoFrame | Pulse | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 63/100 | 71/100 |
| Rank in category | #8 of 41 in Photo Management | #2 of 19 in Infrastructure Monitoring |
| GitHub stars | 1 964 | 6 973 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +32 | +232 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 3 | 43 |
| Latest release | v1.0.2 · 21 Oct 2026 | helm-chart-6.6.0 · 25 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Easy | Easy |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Main language | Typescript | Go |
Which one should you pick?
Pulse scores 71/100 against 63/100 for ChronoFrame, so it is the safer default.
Pulse ships more often: 43 stable releases in the past year, against 3 for ChronoFrame.
Pulse is growing faster right now (+232 stars in 30 days).
ChronoFrame details →Pulse details →
Swap a project
Keep ChronoFrame, compare it with
Keep Pulse, compare it with