Learn how OpenSign and Wraft differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these e-signature platforms is best for you.
Auto-fetched .

Auto-fetched .

Both OpenSign and Wraft have their unique strengths and serve similar purposes effectively. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
OpenSign significantly outpaces Wraft in community adoption with 6,374 stars compared to 138 stars on GitHub. This 46.2x difference suggests OpenSign has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, OpenSign has 708 forks, indicating moderate developer engagement.
Both projects show recent activity, with OpenSign last updated 1 day ago and Wraft 20 days ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, CSS, Bash. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: OpenSign uses Typescript, JSX while Wraft leverages Rust, Lua, Elixir.
Both projects started around the same time, with OpenSign beginning 3 years ago and Wraft 2 years ago.
Both projects use the AGPL-3.0 license, providing identical terms for usage and distribution.
Both tools serve similar use cases in E-Signature Platforms. However, they also have distinct specializations: Wraft extends into Document Management Systems.
Both OpenSign and Wraft offer self-hosting capabilities, giving you full control over your data and infrastructure.