Learn how Plane and Worklenz differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these project management suites 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
Repository

Plane appears to have several advantages over Worklenz, particularly in popularity, growth, maturity and features. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Plane significantly outpaces Worklenz in community adoption with 60,468 stars compared to 3,199 stars on GitHub. This 18.9x difference suggests Plane has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, Plane has 5,986 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
Plane is growing faster, adding 1,457 stars in the last 30 days (+2.5%) against adding 34 stars for Worklenz (+1.1%). Plane is both larger and pulling further ahead.
Both projects show recent activity, with Plane last updated 6 hours ago and Worklenz 6 hours ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, CSS, Bash, Typescript, JSX. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Plane uses Python, Next.js while Worklenz leverages SCSS.
Plane has been in development longer, starting 4 years ago, compared to Worklenz which began 2 years ago. This 1.5-year head start suggests Plane may have more mature features and established processes.
Both projects use the AGPL-3.0 license, providing identical terms for usage and distribution.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Project Management Suites. However, they also have distinct specializations: Plane also focuses on Collaborative Workspaces, Agile Project Management while Worklenz extends into Task Management.
Plane provides self-hosting options for complete data control and customization, while Worklenz may be primarily cloud-based or require different deployment approaches.
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
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs