Learn how Qdrant and Weaviate differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these vector databases is best for you.
Stars
Forks
Last commit
Repository age
License
Auto-fetched .

Stars
Forks
Last commit
Repository age
License
Self-hosted
Auto-fetched .

Weaviate appears to have several advantages over Qdrant, particularly in maturity, licensing and features. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Qdrant leads in popularity with 30,648 stars vs 16,073 stars for Weaviate. The 91% higher star count indicates stronger community adoption. In terms of developer contributions, Qdrant has 2,201 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
Both projects show recent activity, with Qdrant last updated 16 hours ago and Weaviate 19 hours ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, Bash, Python, C. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Qdrant uses Rust, Objective-C while Weaviate leverages Golang.
Weaviate has been in development longer, starting 10 years ago, compared to Qdrant which began 6 years ago. This 4.2-year head start suggests Weaviate may have more mature features and established processes.
Weaviate uses the BSD-3-Clause license, which is more permissive than Qdrant's Apache-2.0 license, potentially offering greater flexibility for commercial use and integration.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Vector Databases. However, they also have distinct specializations: Qdrant also focuses on AI Development Platforms while Weaviate extends into Data Platforms for AI.
Weaviate provides self-hosting options for complete data control and customization, while Qdrant may be primarily cloud-based or require different deployment approaches.