Learn how Flow and Helium differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these web browsers is best for you.
Last 30 days
Last commit
5 months agoRepository age
2 yearsVersion
v0.12.0License
GPL-3.0Repository
flow-browser
Last 30 days
Last commit
18 hours agoRepository age
2 yearsVersion
0.20.3License
GPL-3.0Repository
imputnet/helium
Helium appears to have several advantages over Flow, particularly in popularity, growth and activity. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Helium significantly outpaces Flow in community adoption with 22,283 stars compared to 1,092 stars on GitHub. This 20.4x difference suggests Helium has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, Helium has 680 forks, indicating moderate developer engagement.
Helium is growing faster, adding 1,109 stars in the last 30 days (+5.2%) against adding 14 stars for Flow (+1.3%). Helium is both larger and pulling further ahead.
Helium shows more recent development activity with its last commit 18 hours ago, while Flow was last updated 5 months ago. This suggests Helium is being more actively maintained.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Flow uses CSS, Typescript, JSX while Helium leverages Bash, Python.
Both projects started around the same time, with Flow beginning 2 years ago and Helium 2 years ago.
Both projects use the GPL-3.0 license, providing identical terms for usage and distribution.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Web Browsers.