deer-flowvsqm-music
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| deer-flow | qm-music | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 86/100 | 51/100 |
| Rank in category | #5 of 209 in AI Agents | #20 of 59 in Music Streaming |
| GitHub stars | 84 615 | 588 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +1 667 | +0 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 2 | 11 |
| Latest release | v2.1.0 · 24 Sept 2026 | v2.5.0 · 10 Sept 2026 |
| Setup | Advanced | Easy |
| Official Docker image | No | Yes |
| License | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| Main language | Python | Java |
Which one should you pick?
deer-flow scores 86/100 against 51/100 for qm-music, so it is the safer default.
qm-music ships more often: 11 stable releases in the past year, against 2 for deer-flow.
If you want the quickest setup, qm-music is easier to run; deer-flow needs more configuration.
deer-flow is growing faster right now (+1 667 stars in 30 days).
deer-flow details →qm-music details →