Learn how Bruno and Hoppscotch differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these api clients is best for you.
Last 30 days
Last commit
Repository age
Version
License
Repository

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

Hoppscotch appears to have several advantages over Bruno, particularly in popularity, maturity and features. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Hoppscotch leads in popularity with 80,119 stars vs 46,646 stars for Bruno. The 72% higher star count indicates stronger community adoption. In terms of developer contributions, Hoppscotch has 6,063 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
Bruno is growing faster, adding 596 stars in the last 30 days (+1.3%) against adding 181 stars for Hoppscotch (+0.2%). Bruno is the smaller project of the two, so it is closing the gap rather than extending a lead.
Both projects show recent activity, with Bruno last updated 2 days ago and Hoppscotch 2 days ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, CSS, Bash, Typescript, SCSS. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Bruno uses JSX while Hoppscotch leverages Rust, Vue, Tauri, NestJS.
Hoppscotch has been in development longer, starting 7 years ago, compared to Bruno which began 4 years ago. This 3.1-year head start suggests Hoppscotch 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 API Clients.
Hoppscotch provides self-hosting options for complete data control and customization, while Bruno may be primarily cloud-based or require different deployment approaches.