# Stirling-PDF vs url-to-png

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

| | Stirling-PDF | url-to-png |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 87/100 ✓ | 49/100 |
| Rank in category | #1 of 46 in Document Management | #13 of 16 in Web Scraping |
| GitHub stars | 95 289 ✓ | 256 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +2 327 ✓ | +0 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 25 ✓ | 2 |
| Latest release | v3.2.2 · 24 Oct 2026 ✓ | v2.1.4 · 18 Apr 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Easy ✓ |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | Other | MIT |
| Main language | Typescript | Typescript |

## Which one should you pick?

Stirling-PDF scores 87/100 against 49/100 for url-to-png, so it is the safer default.

Stirling-PDF ships more often: 25 stable releases in the past year, against 2 for url-to-png.

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

Stirling-PDF is growing faster right now (+2 327 stars in 30 days).

## Details

- [Stirling-PDF](https://selfhost.directory/project/stirling-pdf) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/stirling-pdf.md)
- [url-to-png](https://selfhost.directory/project/url-to-png) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/url-to-png.md)

---
Source: https://selfhost.directory/compare/stirling-pdf-vs-url-to-png