Learn how Budibase and Rowy 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.
Stars
Forks
Last commit
Repository age
Self-hosted
Auto-fetched .

Stars
Forks
Last commit
Repository age
Warning: This project hasn't been updated in 1 year and might not be actively maintained anymore.
Auto-fetched .

Budibase appears to have several advantages over Rowy, particularly in popularity, activity and features. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, activity, technology, maturity and features when making your decision.
Budibase significantly outpaces Rowy in community adoption with 27,832 stars compared to 6,804 stars on GitHub. This 4.1x difference suggests Budibase has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, Budibase has 2,124 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
Budibase shows more recent development activity with its last commit 2 days ago, while Rowy was last updated 1 year ago. This suggests Budibase is being more actively maintained.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, CSS, Typescript, JSX. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Budibase uses Bash, Next.js, Nuxt.js.
Both projects started around the same time, with Budibase beginning 7 years ago and Rowy 7 years ago.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Low-Code/No-Code. However, they also have distinct specializations: Rowy extends into Backend-as-a-Service (BaaS).
Budibase provides self-hosting options for complete data control and customization, while Rowy may be primarily cloud-based or require different deployment approaches.