Learn how Fluxer and Hazel differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these team chat & messaging tools is best for you.
Last 30 days
Last commit
8 hours agoRepository age
10 monthsVersion
2026.1026.5027License
AGPL-3.0Self-hosted
YesRepository
fluxerapp/fluxer
Last 30 days
Last commit
11 days agoRepository age
2 yearsVersion
v1.0.2License
FSL-1.1-ALv2Self-hosted
YesRepository
mapletechlabs/hazel
Fluxer appears to have several advantages over Hazel, particularly in popularity and growth. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Fluxer significantly outpaces Hazel in community adoption with 10,660 stars compared to 729 stars on GitHub. This 14.6x difference suggests Fluxer has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, Fluxer has 832 forks, indicating moderate developer engagement.
Fluxer is growing faster, adding 273 stars in the last 30 days (+2.6%) against adding 5 stars for Hazel (+0.7%). Fluxer is both larger and pulling further ahead.
Both projects show recent activity, with Fluxer last updated 8 hours ago and Hazel 11 days ago.
Both projects started around the same time, with Fluxer beginning 10 months ago and Hazel 2 years ago.
The projects use different licenses: Fluxer is licensed under AGPL-3.0 while Hazel uses FSL-1.1-ALv2. Consider the licensing requirements when choosing for your project.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Team Chat & Messaging. However, they also have distinct specializations: Fluxer also focuses on Encrypted Communication.
Both Fluxer and Hazel offer self-hosting capabilities, giving you full control over your data and infrastructure.
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs