Learn how Kdenlive and OpenCut differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these video editing software is best for you.
Last 30 days
Last commit
5 hours agoRepository age
11 yearsLicense
GPL-3.0Repository
kde/kdenlive
Last 30 days
Last commit
2 months agoRepository age
1 yearVersion
v0.3.0License
MITRepository
opencut-app/opencut
Both Kdenlive and OpenCut have their unique strengths and serve similar purposes effectively. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
OpenCut significantly outpaces Kdenlive in community adoption with 97,864 stars compared to 6,073 stars on GitHub. This 16.1x difference suggests OpenCut has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, OpenCut has 9,761 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
OpenCut is growing faster, adding 4,397 stars in the last 30 days (+4.7%) against adding 249 stars for Kdenlive (+4.3%). OpenCut is both larger and pulling further ahead.
Kdenlive shows more recent development activity with its last commit 5 hours ago, while OpenCut was last updated 2 months ago. This suggests Kdenlive is being more actively maintained.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Kdenlive uses Bash, Python, C, Objective-C, C++ while OpenCut leverages CSS, Typescript, JSX, Next.js.
Kdenlive has been in development longer, starting 11 years ago, compared to OpenCut which began 1 year ago. This 9.9-year head start suggests Kdenlive may have more mature features and established processes.
OpenCut uses the MIT license, which is more permissive than Kdenlive's GPL-3.0 license, potentially offering greater flexibility for commercial use and integration.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Video Editors.