# deer-flow vs qm-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).

## Details

- [deer-flow](https://selfhost.directory/project/deer-flow) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/deer-flow.md)
- [qm-music](https://selfhost.directory/project/qm-music) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/qm-music.md)

---
Source: https://selfhost.directory/compare/deer-flow-vs-qm-music