# retroassembly vs TypeType

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

| | retroassembly | TypeType |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 56/100 ✓ | 48/100 |
| Rank in category | #5 of 5 in Emulation | #66 of 118 in Media Server |
| GitHub stars | 1 153 ✓ | 471 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +72 ✓ | +0 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 3 | 11 ✓ |
| Latest release | v7.260719.1051 · 19 Jul 2026 | v1.12.0 · 29 Oct 2026 ✓ |
| Setup | Easy ✓ | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Main language | Typescript | Shell |

## Which one should you pick?

retroassembly scores 56/100 against 48/100 for TypeType, so it is the safer default.

TypeType ships more often: 11 stable releases in the past year, against 3 for retroassembly.

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

retroassembly is growing faster right now (+72 stars in 30 days).

## Details

- [retroassembly](https://selfhost.directory/project/retroassembly) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/retroassembly.md)
- [TypeType](https://selfhost.directory/project/typetype) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/typetype.md)

---
Source: https://selfhost.directory/compare/retroassembly-vs-typetype