Reactive Resumevsstatic_status
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| Reactive Resume | static_status | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 87/100 | 50/100 |
| Rank in category | #1 of 46 in Document Management | #24 of 51 in Monitoring & observability |
| GitHub stars | 45 067 | 732 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +1 666 | +0 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 35 | 0 |
| Latest release | v6.0.8 · 29 Oct 2026 | — |
| Setup | Moderate | Easy |
| Official Docker image | Yes | No |
| License | MIT | GPL-3.0 |
| Main language | Typescript | Shell |
Which one should you pick?
Reactive Resume scores 87/100 against 50/100 for static_status, so it is the safer default.
Reactive Resume ships more often: 35 stable releases in the past year, against 0 for static_status.
If you want the quickest setup, static_status is easier to run; Reactive Resume needs more configuration.
Reactive Resume is growing faster right now (+1 666 stars in 30 days).
Reactive Resume details →static_status details →
Swap a project
Keep Reactive Resume, compare it with
Keep static_status, compare it with