Crater vs Hyperswitch
Learn how Crater and Hyperswitch differ in their key features, development activity, technology
stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these fintech infrastructure tools is best for you.
Learn how Crater and Hyperswitch differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these fintech infrastructure tools is best for you.
Crater
Last 30 days
Last commit
2 years agoRepository age
7 yearsVersion
6.0.6License
AGPL-3.0Repository
crater-invoice/crater
Hyperswitch
Last 30 days
Last commit
4 hours agoRepository age
4 yearsVersion
v1.126.0License
Apache-2.0Repository
juspay/hyperswitch
Detailed Comparison
Hyperswitch appears to have several advantages over Crater, particularly in popularity, growth and activity. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Hyperswitch appears to have several advantages over Crater, particularly in popularity, growth and activity. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Community & Popularity
Hyperswitch significantly outpaces Crater in community adoption with 43,568 stars compared to 8,342 stars on GitHub. This 5.2x difference suggests Hyperswitch has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, Hyperswitch has 5,106 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
Growth Momentum
Hyperswitch is growing faster, adding 188 stars in the last 30 days (+0.4%) against adding 11 stars for Crater (+0.1%). Hyperswitch is both larger and pulling further ahead.
Development Activity
Hyperswitch shows more recent development activity with its last commit 4 hours ago, while Crater was last updated 2 years ago. This suggests Hyperswitch is being more actively maintained.
Technology Stack
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, Bash, Typescript. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Crater uses SCSS, Vue, PHP, Laravel while Hyperswitch leverages CSS, Rust.
Project Maturity
Crater has been in development longer, starting 7 years ago, compared to Hyperswitch which began 4 years ago. This 3.0-year head start suggests Crater may have more mature features and established processes.
Licensing
The projects use different licenses: Crater is licensed under AGPL-3.0 while Hyperswitch uses Apache-2.0. Consider the licensing requirements when choosing for your project.
Use Cases & Features
Both tools serve similar use cases in Fintech Infrastructure. However, they also have distinct specializations: Crater also focuses on Accounting Software, Invoicing & Payments while Hyperswitch extends into Payment Infrastructure.
Sevalla – Deploy your app before your coffee gets cold. It’s that easy. Try Sevalla with $50 free credit.