Learn More

Automa vs Structr

Learn how Automa and Structr differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these low-code/no-code platforms is best for you.

vs
Favicon of Automa

Automa

No-code platform for building AI agents and RPA workflows that automate repetitive business tasks across finance, HR, sales, and operations.
21,631stars+52(+0.2%)

Last 30 days

  • Last commit


    7 months ago
  • Repository age


    5 years
  • Version


    v1.29.12
  • Repository


    automaapp/automa
Sponsor Automa ongithub.com
Screenshot of Automa
Favicon of Structr

Structr

Open-source low-code platform combining Neo4j graph database, visual schema editor, automatic REST APIs, and page rendering in one self-hosted environment.
829stars+1(+0.1%)

Last 30 days

Screenshot of Structr

Detailed Comparison

Structr appears to have several advantages over Automa, particularly in activity, maturity and features. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity and features when making your decision.

Automa wins
Community & Popularity

Automa significantly outpaces Structr in community adoption with 21,631 stars compared to 829 stars on GitHub. This 26.1x difference suggests Automa has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, Automa has 2,340 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.

Comparable
Growth Momentum

Automa and Structr are moving at much the same rate, adding 52 stars and adding 1 stars respectively over the last 30 days (+0.2% vs +0.1%). Neither is pulling away from the other on momentum alone.

Structr wins
Development Activity

Structr shows more recent development activity with its last commit 11 days ago, while Automa was last updated 7 months ago. This suggests Structr is being more actively maintained.

Comparable
Technology Stack

Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, CSS. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Automa uses Vue while Structr leverages Bash, Typescript, Java.

Structr wins
Project Maturity

Structr has been in development longer, starting 16 years ago, compared to Automa which began 5 years ago. This 10.8-year head start suggests Structr may have more mature features and established processes.

Comparable
Use Cases & Features

Both tools serve similar use cases in Low-Code/No-Code. However, they also have distinct specializations: Automa also focuses on Browser Automation.

Structr wins
Hosting & Deployment

Structr provides self-hosting options for complete data control and customization, while Automa may be primarily cloud-based or require different deployment approaches.

Other tool comparisons to consider