TradingAgentsvswraft
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| TradingAgents | wraft | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 87/100 | 44/100 |
| Rank in category | #3 of 209 in AI Agents | #35 of 46 in Document Management |
| GitHub stars | 117 967 | 167 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +5 608 | +0 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 11 | 3 |
| Latest release | v0.7.1 · 27 Oct 2026 | v0.6.7 · 25 Sept 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | No | Yes |
| License | Apache-2.0 | AGPL-3.0 |
| Main language | Python | Elixir |
Which one should you pick?
TradingAgents scores 87/100 against 44/100 for wraft, so it is the safer default.
TradingAgents ships more often: 11 stable releases in the past year, against 3 for wraft.
If you want the quickest setup, TradingAgents is easier to run; wraft needs more configuration.
TradingAgents is growing faster right now (+5 608 stars in 30 days).
TradingAgents details →wraft details →