deceptifeedvsdocker-pi-hole
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| deceptifeed | docker-pi-hole | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 43/100 | 77/100 |
| Rank in category | #59 of 78 in Security | #3 of 41 in DNS |
| GitHub stars | 140 | 11 727 |
| Stars, last 30 days | — | +114 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 5 | 12 |
| Latest release | v0.69.0 · 14 Jul 2026 | 2026.10.0 · 17 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Easy |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | MIT | Other |
| Main language | Go | Shell |
Which one should you pick?
docker-pi-hole scores 77/100 against 43/100 for deceptifeed, so it is the safer default.
docker-pi-hole ships more often: 12 stable releases in the past year, against 5 for deceptifeed.
If you want the quickest setup, docker-pi-hole is easier to run; deceptifeed needs more configuration.
docker-pi-hole is growing faster right now (+114 stars in 30 days).
deceptifeed details →docker-pi-hole details →
Swap a project
Keep deceptifeed, compare it with
Keep docker-pi-hole, compare it with