head to head · open source
Ladybird vs chatGPTBox
Ladybird has 66,807 GitHub stars, 3,194 forks, 535 open issues and last shipped yesterday. chatGPTBox has 10,772 stars, 881 forks, 211 open issues and last shipped yesterday. Ladybird leads on adoption by 520% (66,807 vs 10,772 stars). Ladybird is written in C++ under BSD-2-Clause; chatGPTBox is written in JavaScript under MIT. Ladybird has attracted 5% as many forks as stars, chatGPTBox 8%. Ladybird 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.
← all 20902 open source comparisons
Side by side
| Ladybird | chatGPTBox | |
|---|---|---|
| GitHub stars | ★ 67K | ★ 11K |
| License | BSD-2-Clause | MIT |
| Written in | C++ | JavaScript |
| Last push | 2026-11-02 | 2026-11-02 |
| Forks | ⑂ 3.2K | ⑂ 881 |
| Self-hosting | Yes | Yes |
| Data ownership | Your server | Your server |
pick Ladybird if
- You weight community size — 67K stars and counting
- You want the BSD-2-Clause license terms
- Your stack matches C++
- You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance
pick chatGPTBox if
- You want the chatGPTBox feature set and don't need the biggest community
- You prefer the MIT license terms
- Your stack matches JavaScript
- You evaluated both and chatGPTBox fits your workflow better
About Ladybird
Ladybird Ladybird is a truly independent web browser, using a novel engine based on web standards. [!IMPORTANT] Ladybird is in a pre alpha state, and only suitable for use by developers Features We aim to build a complete, usable browser for the modern web. Ladybird uses a multi process architecture with a main UI process, several WebContent renderer processes, an ImageDecoder process, and a RequestServer process. Image decoding and network connections are done out of process to be more robust against malicious content. Each tab has its own renderer process, which is sandboxed from the rest of the system. At the…
read the full Ladybird overview →
About chatGPTBox
ChatGPTBox Deep ChatGPT integrations in your browser, completely for free. [![license][license image]][license url] [![release][release image]][release url] [ ][release url] [![verify][verify image]][verify url] [![coverage][coverage image]][coverage url] English Indonesia 简体中文 日本語 Türkçe Install [![Chrome][Chrome image]][Chrome url] [![Edge][Edge image]][Edge url] [![Firefox][Firefox image]][Firefox url] [![Safari][Safari image]][Safari url] [![Android][Android image]][Android url] [![GitHub][Github image]][Github url] Guide Preview [Development & Contributing][dev url] Video Demonstration Credits [dev url]…
read the full chatGPTBox overview →
More in Productivity & Utilities
Related comparisons
More Browsers & Extensions projects
Compare either of these against the rest of the Browsers & Extensions field.
Frequently asked questions
Is Ladybird or chatGPTBox more popular?
Ladybird has 66,807 GitHub stars and chatGPTBox has 10,772. Ladybird has the larger community by that measure.
Are Ladybird and chatGPTBox free?
Both are open source. Ladybird is licensed under BSD-2-Clause and chatGPTBox under MIT. Neither carries a licence fee.
What is the difference between Ladybird and chatGPTBox?
Ladybird is written in C++ and chatGPTBox in JavaScript. The practical differences are community size, licence terms, language stack and release cadence — all compared in the table above.
Which should I choose, Ladybird or chatGPTBox?
Choose Ladybird if you want the larger community (66,807 stars) or its BSD-2-Clause licence terms. Choose chatGPTBox if its feature set, stack or MIT licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.