copypartyvsPulse
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| copyparty | Pulse | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 82/100 | 71/100 |
| Rank in category | #1 of 86 in File Sharing | #2 of 19 in Infrastructure Monitoring |
| GitHub stars | 47 163 | 6 970 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +390 | +229 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 19 | 43 |
| Latest release | v1.20.26 · 14 Oct 2026 | helm-chart-6.6.0 · 25 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 71/100 for Pulse, so it is the safer default.
Pulse ships more often: 43 stable releases in the past year, against 19 for copyparty.
If you want the quickest setup, Pulse is easier to run; copyparty needs more configuration.
copyparty details →Pulse details →
Swap a project
Keep copyparty, compare it with
Keep Pulse, compare it with