PhotoMigratorvsStash
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| PhotoMigrator | Stash | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 50/100 | 78/100 |
| Rank in category | #21 of 41 in Photo Management | #2 of 142 in Media Management |
| GitHub stars | 268 | 13 308 |
| Stars, last 30 days | — | +302 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 19 | 7 |
| Latest release | v4.7.0 · 19 Sept 2026 | latest_develop · 24 Jun 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Easy |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | GPL-3.0 | AGPL-3.0 |
| Main language | Python | Go |
Which one should you pick?
Stash scores 78/100 against 50/100 for PhotoMigrator, so it is the safer default.
PhotoMigrator ships more often: 19 stable releases in the past year, against 7 for Stash.
If you want the quickest setup, Stash is easier to run; PhotoMigrator needs more configuration.
Stash is growing faster right now (+302 stars in 30 days).
PhotoMigrator details →Stash details →
Swap a project
Keep PhotoMigrator, compare it with
Keep Stash, compare it with