head to head · open source
Ladybird vs duckduckgo-privacy-extension
Ladybird has 66,807 GitHub stars, 3,194 forks, 535 open issues and last shipped yesterday. duckduckgo-privacy-extension has 1,510 stars, 339 forks, 198 open issues and last shipped yesterday. Ladybird leads on adoption by 4,324% (66,807 vs 1,510 stars). Ladybird is written in C++ under BSD-2-Clause; duckduckgo-privacy-extension is written in JavaScript under Apache-2.0. Ladybird has attracted 5% as many forks as stars, duckduckgo-privacy-extension 22%. 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 | duckduckgo-privacy-extension | |
|---|---|---|
| GitHub stars | ★ 67K | ★ 1.5K |
| License | BSD-2-Clause | Apache-2.0 |
| Written in | C++ | JavaScript |
| Last push | 2026-11-02 | 2026-11-02 |
| Forks | ⑂ 3.2K | ⑂ 339 |
| 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 duckduckgo-privacy-extension if
- You want the duckduckgo-privacy-extension feature set and don't need the biggest community
- You prefer the Apache-2.0 license terms
- Your stack matches JavaScript
- You evaluated both and duckduckgo-privacy-extension 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 duckduckgo-privacy-extension
DuckDuckGo Browser Extensions DuckDuckGo Firefox, Chrome, and Edge extensions. Visit our Web Tracking Protections page to learn how each of our web tracking protections works and how they work together in our browser extensions and apps to provide overlapping protection. DuckDuckGo Privacy Extensions is distributed under the Apache 2.0 License. Latest Versions Firefox Chrome Edge Opera Safari The code for the Safari extension is an Xcode project which you can find here. The Safari extension can be installed from the App Store. Other browsers If you use another Chromium based browser like Vivaldi, you can usually…
read the full duckduckgo-privacy-extension 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 duckduckgo-privacy-extension more popular?
Ladybird has 66,807 GitHub stars and duckduckgo-privacy-extension has 1,510. Ladybird has the larger community by that measure.
Are Ladybird and duckduckgo-privacy-extension free?
Both are open source. Ladybird is licensed under BSD-2-Clause and duckduckgo-privacy-extension under Apache-2.0. Neither carries a licence fee.
What is the difference between Ladybird and duckduckgo-privacy-extension?
Ladybird is written in C++ and duckduckgo-privacy-extension 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 duckduckgo-privacy-extension?
Choose Ladybird if you want the larger community (66,807 stars) or its BSD-2-Clause licence terms. Choose duckduckgo-privacy-extension if its feature set, stack or Apache-2.0 licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.