Learn how Documenso and Wraft differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these e-signature platforms 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

Documenso appears to have several advantages over Wraft, particularly in popularity, growth and maturity. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Documenso significantly outpaces Wraft in community adoption with 15,249 stars compared to 166 stars on GitHub. This 91.9x difference suggests Documenso has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, Documenso has 3,288 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
Documenso is growing faster, adding 435 stars in the last 30 days (+2.9%) against adding 2 stars for Wraft (+1.2%). Documenso is both larger and pulling further ahead.
Both projects show recent activity, with Documenso last updated 21 hours ago and Wraft 21 hours ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, CSS, Bash. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Documenso uses Typescript, JSX, Next.js while Wraft leverages Rust, Lua, Elixir.
Documenso has been in development longer, starting 4 years ago, compared to Wraft which began 2 years ago. This 1.5-year head start suggests Documenso may have more mature features and established processes.
Both projects use the AGPL-3.0 license, providing identical terms for usage and distribution.
Both tools serve similar use cases in E-Signature Platforms. However, they also have distinct specializations: Wraft extends into Document Management Systems.
Both Documenso and Wraft offer self-hosting capabilities, giving you full control over your data and infrastructure.