corednsvsADAMANT IPFS Node
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| coredns | ADAMANT IPFS Node | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 76/100 | 48/100 |
| Rank in category | #5 of 41 in DNS | #8 of 15 in File Storage |
| GitHub stars | 14 399 | 307 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +56 | +0 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 10 | 1 |
| Latest release | v1.15.0 · 21 Oct 2026 | v0.1.0 · 30 Sept 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | Apache-2.0 | GPL-3.0 |
| Main language | Go | Typescript |
Which one should you pick?
coredns scores 76/100 against 48/100 for ADAMANT IPFS Node, so it is the safer default.
coredns ships more often: 10 stable releases in the past year, against 1 for ADAMANT IPFS Node.
If you want the quickest setup, coredns is easier to run; ADAMANT IPFS Node needs more configuration.
coredns is growing faster right now (+56 stars in 30 days).
coredns details →ADAMANT IPFS Node details →
Swap a project
Keep coredns, compare it with
Keep ADAMANT IPFS Node, compare it with