# consul vs mitmproxy

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

| | consul | mitmproxy |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 73/100 | 86/100 ✓ |
| Rank in category | #3 of 31 in Networking | #1 of 48 in Network Monitoring |
| GitHub stars | 30 090 | 46 471 ✓ |
| Stars, last 30 days | +9 | +1 327 ✓ |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 7 ✓ | 5 |
| Latest release | v2.1.0 · 22 Oct 2026 | v12.3.1 · 25 Oct 2026 ✓ |
| Setup | Advanced | Moderate ✓ |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | Other | MIT |
| Main language | Go | Python |

## Which one should you pick?

mitmproxy scores 86/100 against 73/100 for consul, so it is the safer default.

consul ships more often: 7 stable releases in the past year, against 5 for mitmproxy.

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

mitmproxy is growing faster right now (+1 327 stars in 30 days).

## Details

- [consul](https://selfhost.directory/project/consul) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/consul.md)
- [mitmproxy](https://selfhost.directory/project/mitmproxy) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/mitmproxy.md)

---
Source: https://selfhost.directory/compare/consul-vs-mitmproxy