# openclaw vs qm-music

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

| | openclaw | qm-music |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 93/100 ✓ | 51/100 |
| Rank in category | #1 of 125 in AI | #20 of 59 in Music Streaming |
| GitHub stars | 393 312 ✓ | 588 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +2 888 ✓ | +0 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 37 ✓ | 11 |
| Latest release | v2026.10.8 · 27 Oct 2026 ✓ | v2.5.0 · 10 Sept 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Easy ✓ |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| Main language | Typescript | Java |

## Which one should you pick?

openclaw scores 93/100 against 51/100 for qm-music, so it is the safer default.

openclaw ships more often: 37 stable releases in the past year, against 11 for qm-music.

If you want the quickest setup, qm-music is easier to run; openclaw needs more configuration.

openclaw is growing faster right now (+2 888 stars in 30 days).

## Details

- [openclaw](https://selfhost.directory/project/openclaw) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/openclaw.md)
- [qm-music](https://selfhost.directory/project/qm-music) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/qm-music.md)

---
Source: https://selfhost.directory/compare/openclaw-vs-qm-music