# e2b vs MQTTX Web

> Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.

| | e2b | MQTTX Web |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 76/100 ✓ | 67/100 |
| Rank in category | #14 of 209 in AI Agents | #3 of 10 in IoT |
| GitHub stars | 14 595 ✓ | 5 086 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +657 ✓ | +22 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 76 ✓ | 3 |
| Latest release | @e2b/code-interpreter-python@2.11.6 · 28 Oct 2026 ✓ | v1.13.2 · 26 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Easy ✓ |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | Apache-2.0 | Apache-2.0 |
| Main language | Python | Typescript |

## Which one should you pick?

e2b scores 76/100 against 67/100 for MQTTX Web, so it is the safer default.

e2b ships more often: 76 stable releases in the past year, against 3 for MQTTX Web.

If you want the quickest setup, MQTTX Web is easier to run; e2b needs more configuration.

e2b is growing faster right now (+657 stars in 30 days).

## Details

- [e2b](https://selfhost.directory/project/e2b) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/e2b.md)
- [MQTTX Web](https://selfhost.directory/project/mqttx-web) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/mqttx-web.md)

---
Source: https://selfhost.directory/compare/e2b-vs-mqttx-web