head to head · open source

OpenCut vs CrateDB

OpenCut has 89,680 GitHub stars, 8,852 forks, 378 open issues and last shipped 1 months ago. CrateDB has 4,436 stars, 617 forks, 332 open issues and last shipped yesterday. OpenCut leads on adoption by 1,922% (89,680 vs 4,436 stars). OpenCut is written in TypeScript under MIT; CrateDB is written in Java under Apache-2.0. OpenCut has attracted 10% as many forks as stars, CrateDB 14%. CrateDB 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.

OpenCut ★ 90K CrateDB ★ 4.4K category Miscellaneous

← all 8884 open source comparisons

Side by side

OpenCut CrateDB
GitHub stars ★ 90K ★ 4.4K
License MIT Apache-2.0
Written in TypeScript Java
Last push 2026-08-10 2026-09-17
Forks ⑂ 8.9K ⑂ 617
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick OpenCut if

  • You weight community size — 90K stars and counting
  • You want the MIT license terms
  • Your stack matches TypeScript
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full OpenCut profile →

pick CrateDB if

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

full CrateDB profile →

About OpenCut

OpenCut is a free, MIT licensed video editor that runs in the browser and is being rebuilt to serve web, desktop, and mobile from a single codebase, aimed at creators who want an open source alternative to CapCut.

read the full OpenCut overview →

About CrateDB

CrateDB is a distributed, scalable SQL database built for storing and analyzing massive amounts of data in near real time, including complex queries. It is written in Java, licensed under Apache 2.0, and based on Lucene. The project combines the benefits of an SQL database with the scalability and flexibility typically associated with NoSQL databases, and it is PostgreSQL compatible, speaking the PostgreSQL wire protocol as well as offering an HTTP API. It lives in the analytics, big data, and IoT ecosystem, and the topic list places it alongside distributed SQL databases, Elasticsearch, industrial IoT, and IoT a…

read the full CrateDB overview →

More in Miscellaneous

firecrawl ★ 182K Godot ★ 117K Home Assistant ★ 91K OpenBB ★ 73K Jellyfin ★ 57K LosslessCut ★ 44K

Related comparisons

firecrawl vs cratedb home-assistant vs opencut godot vs cratedb home-assistant vs cratedb opencut vs losslesscut opencut vs audacity opencut vs shotcut opencut vs darktable opencut vs krita opencut vs openshot opencut vs gimp opencut vs kdenlive opencut vs fleetbase firecrawl vs home-assistant firecrawl vs gladys-assistant godot vs gladys-assistant firecrawl vs godot godot vs home-assistant firecrawl vs gdevelop firecrawl vs monogame firecrawl vs sbox godot vs gdevelop godot vs monogame godot vs sbox

More Photo & Video Editors projects

Compare either of these against the rest of the Photo & Video Editors field.

OpenCut vs LosslessCut OpenCut vs Audacity OpenCut vs Shotcut OpenCut vs Darktable OpenCut vs Krita OpenCut vs OpenShot OpenCut vs GIMP OpenCut vs Kdenlive OpenCut vs RawTherapee

Frequently asked questions

Is OpenCut or CrateDB more popular?

OpenCut has 89,680 GitHub stars and CrateDB has 4,436. OpenCut has the larger community by that measure.

Are OpenCut and CrateDB free?

Both are open source. OpenCut is licensed under MIT and CrateDB under Apache-2.0. Neither carries a licence fee.

What is the difference between OpenCut and CrateDB?

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

Which should I choose, OpenCut or CrateDB?

Choose OpenCut if you want the larger community (89,680 stars) or its MIT licence terms. Choose CrateDB if its feature set, stack or Apache-2.0 licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.