EnclosedvsWorld Monitor
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| Enclosed | World Monitor | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 62/100 | 86/100 |
| Rank in category | #3 of 19 in Pastebins | #5 of 104 in Monitoring & observability |
| GitHub stars | 2 104 | 89 721 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +16 | +2 382 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 1 | 17 |
| Latest release | v1.16.1 · 23 Oct 2026 | v2.11.6 · 25 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Easy | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | Yes | No |
| License | Apache-2.0 | AGPL-3.0 |
| Main language | Typescript | Typescript |
Which one should you pick?
World Monitor scores 86/100 against 62/100 for Enclosed, so it is the safer default.
World Monitor ships more often: 17 stable releases in the past year, against 1 for Enclosed.
If you want the quickest setup, Enclosed is easier to run; World Monitor needs more configuration.
World Monitor is growing faster right now (+2 382 stars in 30 days).
Enclosed details →World Monitor details →
Swap a project
Keep Enclosed, compare it with
Keep World Monitor, compare it with