# copyparty vs MikroDash

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

| | copyparty | MikroDash |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 82/100 ✓ | 49/100 |
| Rank in category | #1 of 86 in File Sharing | #27 of 48 in Network Monitoring |
| GitHub stars | 47 186 ✓ | 633 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +403 ✓ | +0 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 19 ✓ | 11 |
| Latest release | v1.20.26 · 14 Oct 2026 | v0.8.78 · 29 Oct 2026 ✓ |
| Setup | Moderate | Easy ✓ |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Main language | Python | Go |

## Which one should you pick?

copyparty scores 82/100 against 49/100 for MikroDash, so it is the safer default.

copyparty ships more often: 19 stable releases in the past year, against 11 for MikroDash.

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

copyparty is growing faster right now (+403 stars in 30 days).

## Details

- [copyparty](https://selfhost.directory/project/copyparty) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/copyparty.md)
- [MikroDash](https://selfhost.directory/project/mikrodash) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/mikrodash.md)

---
Source: https://selfhost.directory/compare/copyparty-vs-mikrodash