Learn how ActivePieces and Hatchet differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these workflow automation tools is best for you.
Stars
Forks
Last commit
Repository age
Self-hosted
Auto-fetched .

Auto-fetched .

Both ActivePieces and Hatchet have their unique strengths and serve similar purposes effectively. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
ActivePieces significantly outpaces Hatchet in community adoption with 22,001 stars compared to 7,043 stars on GitHub. This 3.1x difference suggests ActivePieces has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, ActivePieces has 3,610 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
Both projects show recent activity, with ActivePieces last updated 19 hours ago and Hatchet 18 hours ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, CSS, Bash, Typescript, JSX. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Hatchet leverages Python, Next.js, Golang.
ActivePieces has been in development longer, starting 3 years ago, compared to Hatchet which began 2 years ago. This 1.0-year head start suggests ActivePieces may have more mature features and established processes.
Hatchet is licensed under MIT, while ActivePieces's license terms are not publicly specified.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Workflow Automation. However, they also have distinct specializations: ActivePieces also focuses on Low-Code/No-Code, API Integration while Hatchet extends into PaaS & Deployment Tools, Backend-as-a-Service (BaaS), CI/CD Platforms, Job Scheduling.
Both ActivePieces and Hatchet offer self-hosting capabilities, giving you full control over your data and infrastructure.