Learn how Grist and Mathesar differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these low-code/no-code 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

Grist appears to have several advantages over Mathesar, particularly in popularity and growth. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Grist leads in popularity with 11,707 stars vs 5,111 stars for Mathesar. The 129% higher star count indicates stronger community adoption. In terms of developer contributions, Grist has 635 forks, indicating moderate developer engagement.
Grist is growing faster, adding 295 stars in the last 30 days (+2.6%) against adding 28 stars for Mathesar (+0.6%). Grist is both larger and pulling further ahead.
Both projects show recent activity, with Grist last updated 4 hours ago and Mathesar 22 hours ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, CSS, Bash, Typescript, Python. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Mathesar leverages SCSS.
Both projects started around the same time, with Grist beginning 6 years ago and Mathesar 5 years ago.
The projects use different licenses: Grist is licensed under Apache-2.0 while Mathesar uses GPL-3.0. Consider the licensing requirements when choosing for your project.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Low-Code/No-Code, Database Tools & GUIs. However, they also have distinct specializations: Grist also focuses on BI Platforms.
Both Grist and Mathesar offer self-hosting capabilities, giving you full control over your data and infrastructure.