open-wearablesvsstorj
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| open-wearables | storj | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 63/100 | 61/100 |
| Rank in category | #5 of 31 in Health & Fitness | #4 of 7 in Distributed Storage |
| GitHub stars | 2 727 | 3 284 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +172 | +3 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 16 | 39 |
| Latest release | 0.10.0 · 16 Oct 2026 | v1.165.6 · 27 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | Yes | No |
| License | MIT | AGPL-3.0 |
| Main language | Python | Go |
Which one should you pick?
open-wearables scores 63/100 against 61/100 for storj, so it is the safer default.
storj ships more often: 39 stable releases in the past year, against 16 for open-wearables.
If you want the quickest setup, open-wearables is easier to run; storj needs more configuration.
open-wearables is growing faster right now (+172 stars in 30 days).
open-wearables details →storj details →
Swap a project
Keep open-wearables, compare it with
Keep storj, compare it with