head to head · open source

NocoDB vs m_flow

NocoDB has 64,998 GitHub stars, 5,054 forks, 710 open issues and last shipped yesterday. m_flow has 4,504 stars, 258 forks, 13 open issues and last shipped 17 days ago. NocoDB leads on adoption by 1,343% (64,998 vs 4,504 stars). NocoDB is written in TypeScript under a custom or non-standard licence; m_flow is written in Python under Apache-2.0. NocoDB has attracted 8% as many forks as stars, m_flow 6%. NocoDB 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.

NocoDB ★ 65K m_flow ★ 4.5K category Infrastructure & Operations

← all 8884 open source comparisons

Side by side

NocoDB m_flow
GitHub stars ★ 65K ★ 4.5K
License Custom / other Apache-2.0
Written in TypeScript Python
Last push 2026-09-17 2026-09-01
Forks ⑂ 5.1K ⑂ 258
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick NocoDB if

  • You weight community size — 65K stars and counting
  • You want the Custom / other license terms
  • Your stack matches TypeScript
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full NocoDB profile →

pick m_flow if

  • You want the m_flow feature set and don't need the biggest community
  • You prefer the Apache-2.0 license terms
  • Your stack matches Python
  • You evaluated both and m_flow fits your workflow better

full m_flow profile →

About NocoDB

NocoDB is a free and self hostable open source Airtable alternative that turns an existing relational database into an intuitive spreadsheet interface, built for teams who want no code data management without moving their data into a hosted SaaS product.

read the full NocoDB overview →

About m_flow

M flow is a Python bio inspired cognitive memory engine positioned as a new paradigm for Graph RAG. It lives in the LLM retrieval and agent memory ecosystem, as a database like component for knowledge graphs, episodic memory, long term memory, and MCP workflows.

read the full m_flow overview →

More in Infrastructure & Operations

Immich ★ 114K Uptime Kuma ★ 91K worldmonitor ★ 87K mall ★ 85K NetData ★ 81K Elasticsearch ★ 78K

Related comparisons

mall vs nocodb prometheus vs nocodb mall vs prometheus mall vs etcd mall vs dbeaver mall vs orm mall vs milvus mall vs tidb uptime-kuma vs worldmonitor uptime-kuma vs netdata uptime-kuma vs grafana worldmonitor vs netdata worldmonitor vs grafana netdata vs grafana uptime-kuma vs huginn worldmonitor vs huginn immich vs paperless-ngx immich vs ceph immich vs filestash immich vs garage immich vs storj immich vs alarik immich vs spinifex paperless-ngx vs ceph

More Databases projects

Compare either of these against the rest of the Databases field.

NocoDB vs mall NocoDB vs Prometheus NocoDB vs etcd NocoDB vs DBeaver NocoDB vs orm NocoDB vs Milvus NocoDB vs TiDB NocoDB vs drawDB NocoDB vs typeorm NocoDB vs AnotherRedisDesktopManager NocoDB vs Qdrant NocoDB vs rocksdb

Frequently asked questions

Is NocoDB or m_flow more popular?

NocoDB has 64,998 GitHub stars and m_flow has 4,504. NocoDB has the larger community by that measure.

Are NocoDB and m_flow free?

Both are open source. NocoDB has no licence declared in this registry, and m_flow is licensed under Apache-2.0. Both are free to self-host.

What is the difference between NocoDB and m_flow?

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

Which should I choose, NocoDB or m_flow?

Choose NocoDB if you want the larger community (64,998 stars) or its Custom / other licence terms. Choose m_flow if its feature set, stack or Apache-2.0 licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.