corednsvsPulse
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| coredns | Pulse | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 76/100 | 71/100 |
| Rank in category | #5 of 41 in DNS | #2 of 19 in Infrastructure Monitoring |
| GitHub stars | 14 399 | 6 973 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +59 | +232 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 10 | 43 |
| Latest release | v1.15.0 · 21 Oct 2026 | helm-chart-6.6.0 · 25 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Easy |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | Apache-2.0 | MIT |
| Main language | Go | Go |
Which one should you pick?
coredns scores 76/100 against 71/100 for Pulse, so it is the safer default.
Pulse ships more often: 43 stable releases in the past year, against 10 for coredns.
If you want the quickest setup, Pulse is easier to run; coredns needs more configuration.
Pulse is growing faster right now (+232 stars in 30 days).
coredns details →Pulse details →
Swap a project
Keep coredns, compare it with
Keep Pulse, compare it with