Learn how Actual and ezBookkeeping differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these budgeting apps is best for you.
Last 30 days
Last commit
Repository age
Version
License
Self-hosted
Repository

Last 30 days
Last commit
Repository age
Version
License
Self-hosted
Repository

Both Actual and ezBookkeeping have their unique strengths and serve similar purposes effectively. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Actual significantly outpaces ezBookkeeping in community adoption with 28,235 stars compared to 5,427 stars on GitHub. This 5.2x difference suggests Actual has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, Actual has 2,857 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
ezBookkeeping is growing faster, adding 171 stars in the last 30 days (+3.3%) against adding 625 stars for Actual (+2.3%). ezBookkeeping is the smaller project of the two, so it is closing the gap rather than extending a lead.
Both projects show recent activity, with Actual last updated 7 hours ago and ezBookkeeping 9 hours ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, Typescript, SCSS. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Actual uses JSX while ezBookkeeping leverages Bash, Golang, Vue.
ezBookkeeping has been in development longer, starting 6 years ago, compared to Actual which began 4 years ago. This 1.6-year head start suggests ezBookkeeping may have more mature features and established processes.
Both projects use the MIT license, providing identical terms for usage and distribution.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Budgeting Apps. However, they also have distinct specializations: ezBookkeeping extends into Accounting Software.
Both Actual and ezBookkeeping offer self-hosting capabilities, giving you full control over your data and infrastructure.