# geopulse vs woodpecker-ci

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

| | geopulse | woodpecker-ci |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 64/100 | 73/100 ✓ |
| Rank in category | #2 of 6 in Location Tracking | #5 of 28 in CI/CD |
| GitHub stars | 1 466 | 8 068 ✓ |
| Stars, last 30 days | +54 | +161 ✓ |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 32 ✓ | 11 |
| Latest release | v2.1.1 · 25 Oct 2026 | v3.20.0 · 28 Oct 2026 ✓ |
| Setup | Easy ✓ | Moderate |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | Other | Apache-2.0 |
| Main language | Java | Go |

## Which one should you pick?

woodpecker-ci scores 73/100 against 64/100 for geopulse, so it is the safer default.

geopulse ships more often: 32 stable releases in the past year, against 11 for woodpecker-ci.

If you want the quickest setup, geopulse is easier to run; woodpecker-ci needs more configuration.

woodpecker-ci is growing faster right now (+161 stars in 30 days).

## Details

- [geopulse](https://selfhost.directory/project/geopulse) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/geopulse.md)
- [woodpecker-ci](https://selfhost.directory/project/woodpecker-ci) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/woodpecker-ci.md)

---
Source: https://selfhost.directory/compare/geopulse-vs-woodpecker-ci