# firecrawl vs zookeeper

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

| | firecrawl | zookeeper |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 91/100 ✓ | 73/100 |
| Rank in category | #1 of 16 in Web Scraping | #1 of 8 in Configuration Management |
| GitHub stars | 196 570 ✓ | 12 825 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +12 227 ✓ | +14 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 9 ✓ | 0 |
| Latest release | apps/go-sdk/v1.15.0 · 8 Sept 2026 | — |
| Setup | Advanced | Moderate ✓ |
| Official Docker image | Yes ✓ | No |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | Apache-2.0 |
| Main language | Typescript | Java |

## Which one should you pick?

firecrawl scores 91/100 against 73/100 for zookeeper, so it is the safer default.

firecrawl ships more often: 9 stable releases in the past year, against 0 for zookeeper.

If you want the quickest setup, zookeeper is easier to run; firecrawl needs more configuration.

firecrawl is growing faster right now (+12 227 stars in 30 days).

## Details

- [firecrawl](https://selfhost.directory/project/firecrawl) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/firecrawl.md)
- [zookeeper](https://selfhost.directory/project/zookeeper) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/zookeeper.md)

---
Source: https://selfhost.directory/compare/firecrawl-vs-zookeeper