QFieldCloudvsStash
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| QFieldCloud | Stash | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 54/100 | 78/100 |
| Rank in category | #4 of 9 in Mapping & GPS | #2 of 142 in Media Management |
| GitHub stars | 246 | 13 311 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +0 | +301 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 10 | 7 |
| Latest release | v26.29 · 23 Oct 2026 | latest_develop · 24 Jun 2026 |
| Setup | Advanced | Easy |
| Official Docker image | No | Yes |
| License | MIT | AGPL-3.0 |
| Main language | Python | Go |
Which one should you pick?
Stash scores 78/100 against 54/100 for QFieldCloud, so it is the safer default.
QFieldCloud ships more often: 10 stable releases in the past year, against 7 for Stash.
If you want the quickest setup, Stash is easier to run; QFieldCloud needs more configuration.
Stash is growing faster right now (+301 stars in 30 days).
QFieldCloud details →Stash details →
Swap a project
Keep QFieldCloud, compare it with
Keep Stash, compare it with