ReadMeABookvsTradingAgents
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| ReadMeABook | TradingAgents | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 64/100 | 86/100 |
| Rank in category | #3 of 15 in Audiobook Management | #4 of 209 in AI Agents |
| GitHub stars | 1 033 | 117 613 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +65 | +5 254 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 21 | 11 |
| Latest release | v1.2.12 · 27 Oct 2026 | v0.7.1 · 27 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Advanced | Moderate |
| Official Docker image | Yes | No |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | Apache-2.0 |
| Main language | Typescript | Python |
Which one should you pick?
TradingAgents scores 86/100 against 64/100 for ReadMeABook, so it is the safer default.
ReadMeABook ships more often: 21 stable releases in the past year, against 11 for TradingAgents.
If you want the quickest setup, TradingAgents is easier to run; ReadMeABook needs more configuration.
TradingAgents is growing faster right now (+5 254 stars in 30 days).
ReadMeABook details →TradingAgents details →
Swap a project
Keep ReadMeABook, compare it with
Keep TradingAgents, compare it with