# ChronoFrame vs Reactive Resume

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

| | ChronoFrame | Reactive Resume |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 63/100 | 87/100 ✓ |
| Rank in category | #8 of 41 in Photo Management | #1 of 46 in Document Management |
| GitHub stars | 1 964 | 45 030 ✓ |
| Stars, last 30 days | +32 | +1 629 ✓ |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 3 | 35 ✓ |
| Latest release | v1.0.2 · 21 Oct 2026 | v6.0.8 · 29 Oct 2026 ✓ |
| Setup | Easy ✓ | Moderate |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Main language | Typescript | Typescript |

## Which one should you pick?

Reactive Resume scores 87/100 against 63/100 for ChronoFrame, so it is the safer default.

Reactive Resume ships more often: 35 stable releases in the past year, against 3 for ChronoFrame.

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

Reactive Resume is growing faster right now (+1 629 stars in 30 days).

## Details

- [ChronoFrame](https://selfhost.directory/project/chronoframe) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/chronoframe.md)
- [Reactive Resume](https://selfhost.directory/project/reactive-resume) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/reactive-resume.md)

---
Source: https://selfhost.directory/compare/chronoframe-vs-reactive-resume