Learn how Bitwarden and TeamPass differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these password managers 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 Bitwarden and TeamPass have their unique strengths and serve similar purposes effectively. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Bitwarden significantly outpaces TeamPass in community adoption with 20,244 stars compared to 1,831 stars on GitHub. This 11.1x difference suggests Bitwarden has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, Bitwarden has 1,784 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
Bitwarden is growing faster, adding 156 stars in the last 30 days (+0.8%) against adding 3 stars for TeamPass (+0.2%). Bitwarden is both larger and pulling further ahead.
Both projects show recent activity, with Bitwarden last updated 33 minutes ago and TeamPass 16 hours ago.
TeamPass has been in development longer, starting 15 years ago, compared to Bitwarden which began 11 years ago. This 4.0-year head start suggests TeamPass may have more mature features and established processes.
The projects use different licenses: Bitwarden is licensed under AGPL-3.0 while TeamPass uses GPL-3.0. Consider the licensing requirements when choosing for your project.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Password Managers.
Both Bitwarden and TeamPass offer self-hosting capabilities, giving you full control over your data and infrastructure.