# QFieldCloud vs unsloth

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

| | QFieldCloud | unsloth |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 54/100 | 85/100 ✓ |
| Rank in category | #4 of 9 in Mapping & GPS | #1 of 7 in Local AI |
| GitHub stars | 246 | 78 720 ✓ |
| Stars, last 30 days | — | +2 063 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 10 ✓ | 2 |
| Latest release | v26.29 · 23 Oct 2026 ✓ | prebuilt-wheels-cu13 · 27 Sept 2026 |
| Setup | Advanced | Moderate ✓ |
| Official Docker image | No | Yes ✓ |
| License | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| Main language | Python | Python |

## Which one should you pick?

unsloth scores 85/100 against 54/100 for QFieldCloud, so it is the safer default.

QFieldCloud ships more often: 10 stable releases in the past year, against 2 for unsloth.

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

unsloth is growing faster right now (+2 063 stars in 30 days).

## Details

- [QFieldCloud](https://selfhost.directory/project/qfieldcloud) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/qfieldcloud.md)
- [unsloth](https://selfhost.directory/project/unsloth) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/unsloth.md)

---
Source: https://selfhost.directory/compare/qfieldcloud-vs-unsloth