# MikroDash vs temporal

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

| | MikroDash | temporal |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 49/100 | 82/100 ✓ |
| Rank in category | #27 of 48 in Network Monitoring | #1 of 1 in Workflow |
| GitHub stars | 633 | 24 069 ✓ |
| Stars, last 30 days | +0 | +791 ✓ |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 11 | 11 |
| Latest release | v0.8.78 · 29 Oct 2026 ✓ | v1.30.8 · 12 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Easy ✓ | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Main language | Go | Go |

## Which one should you pick?

temporal scores 82/100 against 49/100 for MikroDash, so it is the safer default.

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

temporal is growing faster right now (+791 stars in 30 days).

## Details

- [MikroDash](https://selfhost.directory/project/mikrodash) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/mikrodash.md)
- [temporal](https://selfhost.directory/project/temporal) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/temporal.md)

---
Source: https://selfhost.directory/compare/mikrodash-vs-temporal