# qm-music vs Stirling-PDF

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

| | qm-music | Stirling-PDF |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 51/100 | 87/100 ✓ |
| Rank in category | #20 of 59 in Music Streaming | #1 of 46 in Document Management |
| GitHub stars | 588 | 95 273 ✓ |
| Stars, last 30 days | +0 | +2 311 ✓ |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 11 | 25 ✓ |
| Latest release | v2.5.0 · 10 Sept 2026 | v3.2.2 · 24 Oct 2026 ✓ |
| Setup | Easy ✓ | Moderate |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | Apache-2.0 | Other |
| Main language | Java | Typescript |

## Which one should you pick?

Stirling-PDF scores 87/100 against 51/100 for qm-music, so it is the safer default.

Stirling-PDF ships more often: 25 stable releases in the past year, against 11 for qm-music.

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

Stirling-PDF is growing faster right now (+2 311 stars in 30 days).

## Details

- [qm-music](https://selfhost.directory/project/qm-music) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/qm-music.md)
- [Stirling-PDF](https://selfhost.directory/project/stirling-pdf) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/stirling-pdf.md)

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