UrocissavsWorld Monitor
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| Urocissa | World Monitor | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 48/100 | 86/100 |
| Rank in category | #11 of 19 in Photo Galleries | #5 of 104 in Monitoring & observability |
| GitHub stars | 300 | 89 750 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +0 | +2 411 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 18 | 17 |
| Latest release | 3.4.2 · 21 Sept 2026 | v2.11.6 · 25 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | Yes | No |
| License | MIT | AGPL-3.0 |
| Main language | Rust | Typescript |
Which one should you pick?
World Monitor scores 86/100 against 48/100 for Urocissa, so it is the safer default.
Urocissa ships more often: 18 stable releases in the past year, against 17 for World Monitor.
If you want the quickest setup, Urocissa is easier to run; World Monitor needs more configuration.
World Monitor is growing faster right now (+2 411 stars in 30 days).
Urocissa details →World Monitor details →
Swap a project
Keep Urocissa, compare it with
Keep World Monitor, compare it with