Learn how Dub and Shlink differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these link management & shorteners is best for you.
Stars
Forks
Last commit
Repository age
License
Auto-fetched .

Auto-fetched .

Shlink appears to have several advantages over Dub, particularly in maturity, licensing and features. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Dub significantly outpaces Shlink in community adoption with 23,436 stars compared to 4,922 stars on GitHub. This 4.8x difference suggests Dub has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, Dub has 2,951 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
Both projects show recent activity, with Dub last updated 11 hours ago and Shlink 7 days ago.
Dub uses JavaScript, CSS, Typescript, JSX, Next.js while Shlink leverages Bash, PHP.
Shlink has been in development longer, starting 10 years ago, compared to Dub which began 4 years ago. This 6.5-year head start suggests Shlink may have more mature features and established processes.
Shlink uses the MIT license, which is more permissive than Dub's AGPL-3.0 license, potentially offering greater flexibility for commercial use and integration.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Link Management & Shorteners.
Shlink provides self-hosting options for complete data control and customization, while Dub may be primarily cloud-based or require different deployment approaches.