# QFieldCloud vs Reactive Resume

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

| | QFieldCloud | Reactive Resume |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 54/100 | 87/100 ✓ |
| Rank in category | #4 of 9 in Mapping & GPS | #1 of 46 in Document Management |
| GitHub stars | 246 | 45 040 ✓ |
| Stars, last 30 days | +0 | +1 639 ✓ |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 10 | 35 ✓ |
| Latest release | v26.29 · 23 Oct 2026 | v6.0.8 · 29 Oct 2026 ✓ |
| Setup | Advanced | Moderate ✓ |
| Official Docker image | No | Yes ✓ |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Main language | Python | Typescript |

## Which one should you pick?

Reactive Resume scores 87/100 against 54/100 for QFieldCloud, so it is the safer default.

Reactive Resume ships more often: 35 stable releases in the past year, against 10 for QFieldCloud.

If you want the quickest setup, Reactive Resume is easier to run; QFieldCloud needs more configuration.

Reactive Resume is growing faster right now (+1 639 stars in 30 days).

## Details

- [QFieldCloud](https://selfhost.directory/project/qfieldcloud) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/qfieldcloud.md)
- [Reactive Resume](https://selfhost.directory/project/reactive-resume) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/reactive-resume.md)

---
Source: https://selfhost.directory/compare/qfieldcloud-vs-reactive-resume