ConcatvsKoma
Two self-hosted Video Processing projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| Concat | Koma | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 82/100 | 41/100 |
| Rank in category | #1 of 18 in Video Processing | #15 of 18 in Video Processing |
| GitHub stars | 12 397 | 298 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +2 398 | — |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 6 | 0 |
| Latest release | v0.2.8 · 20 Oct 2026 | — |
| Setup | Easy | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | No | No |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | — |
| Main language | Rust | Typescript |
Which one should you pick?
Concat scores 82/100 against 41/100 for Koma, so it is the safer default.
Concat ships more often: 6 stable releases in the past year, against 0 for Koma.
If you want the quickest setup, Concat is easier to run; Koma needs more configuration.
Concat is growing faster right now (+2 398 stars in 30 days).
Concat details →Koma details →All Video Processing projects →
Swap a project
Keep Concat, compare it with
Keep Koma, compare it with