head to head · open source

bento vs PDF4QT

bento has 5,129 GitHub stars, 356 forks, 38 open issues and last shipped yesterday. PDF4QT has 1,477 stars, 145 forks, 32 open issues and last shipped yesterday. bento leads on adoption by 247% (5,129 vs 1,477 stars). bento is written in TypeScript under MIT; PDF4QT is written in C++ under MIT. bento has attracted 7% as many forks as stars, PDF4QT 10%. bento was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee.

Two open source projects, one decision. Both are free and self-hostable — the differences are community size, license terms, language stack and release pace.

bento ★ 5.1K PDF4QT ★ 1.5K category Productivity & Utilities

← all 15422 open source comparisons

Side by side

bento PDF4QT
GitHub stars ★ 5.1K ★ 1.5K
License MIT MIT
Written in TypeScript C++
Last push 2026-09-18 2026-09-18
Forks ⑂ 356 ⑂ 145
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick bento if

  • You weight community size — 5.1K stars and counting
  • You want the MIT license terms
  • Your stack matches TypeScript
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full bento profile →

pick PDF4QT if

  • You want the PDF4QT feature set and don't need the biggest community
  • You prefer the MIT license terms
  • Your stack matches C++
  • You evaluated both and PDF4QT fits your workflow better

full PDF4QT profile →

About bento

Bento is an MIT licensed, local first PowerPoint alternative that ships as a single self contained HTML file, in which the deck carries its own viewer, presenter and editor so that anyone who opens it in a modern browser can edit or present it without installing anything.

read the full bento overview →

About PDF4QT

PDF4QT is an MIT licensed, cross platform PDF toolkit for Windows and Linux that combines dedicated desktop applications — a viewer, editor, page manipulator, document diff tool and command line utility — with a C++/Qt PDF rendering engine built against the PDF Reference 2.0, and it is aimed at end users, developers and integrators who need PDF handling they can inspect, modify and redistribute without licence friction.

read the full PDF4QT overview →

More in Productivity & Utilities

n8n ★ 205K Excalidraw ★ 132K RustDesk ★ 124K Browser Use ★ 115K LocalSend ★ 92K AppFlowy ★ 77K

Related comparisons

n8n vs cryptpad n8n vs onlyoffice-docs n8n vs libreoffice n8n vs ironcalc n8n vs collabora-online cryptpad vs onlyoffice-docs cryptpad vs libreoffice cryptpad vs ironcalc openclaw vs khoj open-webui vs open-notebook open-webui vs khoj appflowy vs affine appflowy vs memos appflowy vs plane appflowy vs joplin mem0 vs memos n8n vs langchain n8n vs browser-use firecrawl vs browser-use n8n vs langgraph n8n vs frigate n8n vs lightpanda n8n vs proxmoxve n8n vs activepieces

More Office Suites projects

Compare either of these against the rest of the Office Suites field.

bento vs CryptPad bento vs gspread bento vs ONLYOFFICE Docs bento vs LibreOffice bento vs IronCalc bento vs KillerPDF bento vs Collabora Online bento vs yft-design bento vs ZenConverter

Frequently asked questions

Is bento or PDF4QT more popular?

bento has 5,129 GitHub stars and PDF4QT has 1,477. bento has the larger community by that measure.

Are bento and PDF4QT free?

Both are open source. bento is licensed under MIT and PDF4QT under MIT. Neither carries a licence fee.

What is the difference between bento and PDF4QT?

bento is written in TypeScript and PDF4QT in C++. The practical differences are community size, licence terms, language stack and release cadence — all compared in the table above.

Which should I choose, bento or PDF4QT?

Choose bento if you want the larger community (5,129 stars) or its MIT licence terms. Choose PDF4QT if its feature set, stack or MIT licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.