Learn how Sure.am and YAFFA differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these budgeting apps is best for you.
Last 30 days
Last commit
13 hours agoRepository age
1 yearVersion
v0.7.6License
AGPL-3.0Self-hosted
YesRepository
we-promise/sure
Last 30 days
Last commit
18 hours agoRepository age
6 yearsVersion
v4.6.0License
MITSelf-hosted
YesRepository
kantorge/yaffa
Both Sure.am and YAFFA 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.
Sure.am significantly outpaces YAFFA in community adoption with 10,926 stars compared to 113 stars on GitHub. This 96.7x difference suggests Sure.am has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, Sure.am has 749 forks, indicating moderate developer engagement.
Sure.am is growing faster, adding 484 stars in the last 30 days (+4.6%) against adding 3 stars for YAFFA (+2.7%). Sure.am is both larger and pulling further ahead.
Both projects show recent activity, with Sure.am last updated 13 hours ago and YAFFA 18 hours ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, CSS. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Sure.am uses C, Objective-C, Java, Swift, Ruby, Kotlin, MATLAB, Dart while YAFFA leverages SCSS, PHP, Vue, Laravel.
YAFFA has been in development longer, starting 6 years ago, compared to Sure.am which began 1 year ago. This 4.9-year head start suggests YAFFA may have more mature features and established processes.
YAFFA uses the MIT license, which is more permissive than Sure.am's AGPL-3.0 license, potentially offering greater flexibility for commercial use and integration.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Budgeting Apps, Investment Tracking.
Both Sure.am and YAFFA offer self-hosting capabilities, giving you full control over your data and infrastructure.