Learn how Automa and Windmill 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 .

Windmill appears to have several advantages over Automa, particularly in activity and features. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, activity, technology, maturity and features when making your decision.
Both tools have similar popularity levels, with Automa having 21,260 stars and Windmill having 16,381 stars on GitHub. In terms of developer contributions, Automa has 2,308 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
Windmill shows more recent development activity with its last commit 16 hours ago, while Automa was last updated 2 months ago. This suggests Windmill is being more actively maintained.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, CSS. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Automa uses Vue while Windmill leverages Bash, Typescript, Python, Golang, Rust, C, Objective-C, SvelteKit.
Both projects started around the same time, with Automa beginning 5 years ago and Windmill 4 years ago.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Workflow Automation. However, they also have distinct specializations: Automa also focuses on Low-Code/No-Code, Browser Automation while Windmill extends into PaaS & Deployment Tools, Workflow Orchestration.
Windmill provides self-hosting options for complete data control and customization, while Automa may be primarily cloud-based or require different deployment approaches.