Learn how Fluxer and Stoat 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
4 hours agoRepository age
11 monthsVersion
2026.1114.195738License
AGPL-3.0Self-hosted
YesRepository
fluxerapp/fluxer
Last 30 days
Last commit
1 day agoRepository age
5 yearsVersion
v0.16.4Self-hosted
YesRepository
stoatchat/stoatchat
Fluxer appears to have several advantages over Stoat, particularly in popularity, growth and licensing. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Fluxer significantly outpaces Stoat in community adoption with 10,893 stars compared to 3,468 stars on GitHub. This 3.1x difference suggests Fluxer has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, Fluxer has 863 forks, indicating moderate developer engagement.
Fluxer is growing faster, adding 288 stars in the last 30 days (+2.7%) against adding 71 stars for Stoat (+2.1%). Fluxer is both larger and pulling further ahead.
Both projects show recent activity, with Fluxer last updated 4 hours ago and Stoat 1 day ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with Bash, Python, Rust. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Fluxer uses JavaScript, CSS, Typescript, JSX, Golang, Ruby.
Stoat has been in development longer, starting 5 years ago, compared to Fluxer which began 11 months ago. This 4.6-year head start suggests Stoat may have more mature features and established processes.
Fluxer is licensed under AGPL-3.0, while Stoat's license terms are not publicly specified.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Team Chat & Messaging, Encrypted Communication.
Both Fluxer and Stoat 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
vs
vs