# transcriber vs trigger

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

| | transcriber | trigger |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 41/100 | 76/100 ✓ |
| Rank in category | #10 of 15 in Audio Processing | #7 of 32 in Workflow Automation |
| GitHub stars | 154 | 16 650 ✓ |
| Stars, last 30 days | +1 | +251 ✓ |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 0 | 49 ✓ |
| Latest release | — | v4.8.1 · 23 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate ✓ | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | No | Yes ✓ |
| License | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| Main language | Python | Typescript |

## Which one should you pick?

trigger scores 76/100 against 41/100 for transcriber, so it is the safer default.

trigger ships more often: 49 stable releases in the past year, against 0 for transcriber.

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

trigger is growing faster right now (+251 stars in 30 days).

## Details

- [transcriber](https://selfhost.directory/project/transcriber) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/transcriber.md)
- [trigger](https://selfhost.directory/project/trigger) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/trigger.md)

---
Source: https://selfhost.directory/compare/transcriber-vs-trigger