openclawvsPulse
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| openclaw | Pulse | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 93/100 | 71/100 |
| Rank in category | #1 of 125 in AI | #2 of 19 in Infrastructure Monitoring |
| GitHub stars | 393 278 | 6 970 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +2 930 | +229 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 37 | 43 |
| Latest release | v2026.10.8 · 27 Oct 2026 | helm-chart-6.6.0 · 25 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Easy |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Main language | Typescript | Go |
Which one should you pick?
openclaw scores 93/100 against 71/100 for Pulse, so it is the safer default.
Pulse ships more often: 43 stable releases in the past year, against 37 for openclaw.
If you want the quickest setup, Pulse is easier to run; openclaw needs more configuration.
openclaw is growing faster right now (+2 930 stars in 30 days).
openclaw details →Pulse details →
Swap a project
Keep openclaw, compare it with
Keep Pulse, compare it with