head to head · open source

worldmonitor vs evo

worldmonitor has 86,752 GitHub stars, 13,161 forks, 313 open issues and last shipped today. evo has 4,316 stars, 797 forks, 7 open issues and last shipped 10 days ago. worldmonitor leads on adoption by 1,910% (86,752 vs 4,316 stars). worldmonitor is written in TypeScript under AGPL-3.0; evo is written in Python under GPL-3.0. worldmonitor has attracted 15% as many forks as stars, evo 18%. worldmonitor 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.

worldmonitor ★ 87K evo ★ 4.3K category Infrastructure & Operations

← all 8884 open source comparisons

Side by side

worldmonitor evo
GitHub stars ★ 87K ★ 4.3K
License AGPL-3.0 GPL-3.0
Written in TypeScript Python
Last push 2026-09-18 2026-09-08
Forks ⑂ 13K ⑂ 797
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick worldmonitor if

  • You weight community size — 87K stars and counting
  • You want the AGPL-3.0 license terms
  • Your stack matches TypeScript
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full worldmonitor profile →

pick evo if

  • You want the evo feature set and don't need the biggest community
  • You prefer the GPL-3.0 license terms
  • Your stack matches Python
  • You evaluated both and evo fits your workflow better

full evo profile →

About worldmonitor

World Monitor is an open source, real time global intelligence dashboard in TypeScript that aggregates news with AI, monitors geopolitics and infrastructure, and unifies all of it into a single situational awareness interface for analysts, journalists, researchers, and operations teams who need cross domain awareness they can self host.

read the full worldmonitor overview →

About evo

evo is a Python package, released under the GPL 3.0 licence, that provides executables and a small library for handling, evaluating and comparing the trajectory output of odometry and SLAM algorithms, and it is aimed at robotics researchers and engineers who need to benchmark trajectories rather than maintain one evaluation script per dataset.

read the full evo overview →

More in Infrastructure & Operations

Immich ★ 114K Uptime Kuma ★ 91K mall ★ 85K NetData ★ 81K Elasticsearch ★ 78K Grafana ★ 77K

Related comparisons

uptime-kuma vs worldmonitor worldmonitor vs netdata worldmonitor vs grafana worldmonitor vs huginn worldmonitor vs openvpn worldmonitor vs wr-do worldmonitor vs plakar worldmonitor vs pluton uptime-kuma vs netdata uptime-kuma vs grafana netdata vs grafana uptime-kuma 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 mall vs prometheus mall vs nocodb mall vs etcd mall vs dbeaver

More Monitoring & Observability projects

Compare either of these against the rest of the Monitoring & Observability field.

worldmonitor vs Uptime Kuma worldmonitor vs NetData worldmonitor vs Grafana worldmonitor vs huginn worldmonitor vs Sentry worldmonitor vs SigNoz worldmonitor vs Grafana Loki worldmonitor vs beszel worldmonitor vs cilium worldmonitor vs Apache SkyWalking worldmonitor vs jaeger worldmonitor vs Vector

Frequently asked questions

Is worldmonitor or evo more popular?

worldmonitor has 86,752 GitHub stars and evo has 4,316. worldmonitor has the larger community by that measure.

Are worldmonitor and evo free?

Both are open source. worldmonitor is licensed under AGPL-3.0 and evo under GPL-3.0. Neither carries a licence fee.

What is the difference between worldmonitor and evo?

worldmonitor is written in TypeScript and evo 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, worldmonitor or evo?

Choose worldmonitor if you want the larger community (86,752 stars) or its AGPL-3.0 licence terms. Choose evo if its feature set, stack or GPL-3.0 licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.