# hosting vs self-hosted-livesync-server

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

| | hosting | self-hosted-livesync-server |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 27/100 | 45/100 ✓ |
| Rank in category | #3 of 3 in Video Hosting | #37 of 40 in Database Management |
| GitHub stars | 11 | 274 ✓ |
| Stars, last 30 days | +0 | +0 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 0 | 0 |
| Latest release | — | — |
| Setup | Advanced | Moderate ✓ |
| Official Docker image | No | No |
| License | GPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Main language | JavaScript | Shell |

## Which one should you pick?

self-hosted-livesync-server scores 45/100 against 27/100 for hosting, so it is the safer default.

If you want the quickest setup, self-hosted-livesync-server is easier to run; hosting needs more configuration.

## Details

- [hosting](https://selfhost.directory/project/hosting) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/hosting.md)
- [self-hosted-livesync-server](https://selfhost.directory/project/self-hosted-livesync-server) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/self-hosted-livesync-server.md)

---
Source: https://selfhost.directory/compare/hosting-vs-self-hosted-livesync-server