head to head · open source

Hoppscotch vs fuego

Hoppscotch has 80,336 GitHub stars, 6,112 forks, 820 open issues and last shipped 3 days ago. fuego has 1,775 stars, 129 forks, 18 open issues and last shipped 4 days ago. Hoppscotch leads on adoption by 4,426% (80,336 vs 1,775 stars). Hoppscotch is written in TypeScript under MIT; fuego is written in Go under MIT. Hoppscotch has attracted 8% as many forks as stars, fuego 7%. Hoppscotch 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.

Hoppscotch ★ 80K fuego ★ 1.8K category Developer Tools

← all 13541 open source comparisons

Side by side

Hoppscotch fuego
GitHub stars ★ 80K ★ 1.8K
License MIT MIT
Written in TypeScript Go
Last push 2026-09-16 2026-09-15
Forks ⑂ 6.1K ⑂ 129
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick Hoppscotch if

  • You weight community size — 80K stars and counting
  • You want the MIT license terms
  • Your stack matches TypeScript
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full Hoppscotch profile →

pick fuego if

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

full fuego profile →

About Hoppscotch

Hoppscotch is an open source API development ecosystem that provides a full featured client for designing, testing, and documenting APIs. It operates as a web based application, desktop app, and CLI tool, supporting offline, on premises, and cloud deployments. Built with TypeScript and licensed under MIT, it serves as a direct open source alternative to proprietary tools like Postman and Insomnia.

read the full Hoppscotch overview →

About fuego

Fuego is an MIT licensed, production ready Go web framework that generates an OpenAPI 3 specification directly from source code, aimed at Go developers building HTTP APIs and web applications who want their documentation to stay in sync with their handlers.

read the full fuego overview →

More in Developer Tools

react ★ 251K OpenCode ★ 208K vscode ★ 193K Langflow ★ 155K Supabase ★ 110K pi ★ 107K

Related comparisons

fastapi vs hoppscotch hoppscotch vs bruno fastapi vs bruno fastapi vs insomnia fastapi vs one-api fastapi vs openapi-specification fastapi vs openapi-generator fastapi vs redoc openclaw vs langflow n8n vs langflow langflow vs langchain langflow vs supabase n8n vs tooljet n8n vs appsmith n8n vs budibase langflow vs pocketbase openclaw vs openhands openclaw vs paperclip hermes-agent vs pi hermes-agent vs openhands hermes-agent vs paperclip opencode vs pi opencode vs openhands opencode vs paperclip

More API Development & Testing projects

Compare either of these against the rest of the API Development & Testing field.

Hoppscotch vs fastapi Hoppscotch vs Bruno Hoppscotch vs Insomnia Hoppscotch vs one-api Hoppscotch vs OpenAPI-Specification Hoppscotch vs openapi-generator Hoppscotch vs redoc Hoppscotch vs SafeLine Hoppscotch vs Mobile-Security-Framework-MobSF Hoppscotch vs grpc-gateway Hoppscotch vs Yaak Hoppscotch vs hurl

Frequently asked questions

Is Hoppscotch or fuego more popular?

Hoppscotch has 80,336 GitHub stars and fuego has 1,775. Hoppscotch has the larger community by that measure.

Are Hoppscotch and fuego free?

Both are open source. Hoppscotch is licensed under MIT and fuego under MIT. Neither carries a licence fee.

What is the difference between Hoppscotch and fuego?

Hoppscotch is written in TypeScript and fuego in Go. The practical differences are community size, licence terms, language stack and release cadence — all compared in the table above.

Which should I choose, Hoppscotch or fuego?

Choose Hoppscotch if you want the larger community (80,336 stars) or its MIT licence terms. Choose fuego if its feature set, stack or MIT licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.