Head-to-Head Comparison
Self-hosted LiveSync vs Wiki.js
A side-by-side technical evaluation across security posture, maintenance cadence, community vitality, and commercial licensing within the Notes & Documentation category.
Option A
Self-hosted LiveSync
vrtmrz/obsidian-livesync86/100
Community-developed CouchDB synchronization server and plugin for Obsidian notes.
HealthyFull Audit Report →
Option B
Wiki.js
requarks/wiki67/100
Node.js documentation engine with Git synchronization and modular storage backends.
CautionFull Audit Report →
Technical & Metric Comparison
Verifiable data scraped directly from GitHub API and OpenSSF scorecards.
| Metric | Self-hosted LiveSync | Wiki.js | Advantage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Composite Safety Score | 86/100 | 67/100 | Self-hosted LiveSync |
| Status Verdict | Healthy | Caution | — |
| License SPDX | MIT | AGPL-3.0-only | — |
| GitHub Stars | 5,800 | 25,400 | Wiki.js (+19,600) |
| Primary Language | TypeScript | JavaScript / Vue | — |
| Self-Host Difficulty | Medium | Medium | — |
| OpenSSF Scorecard | 7.7/10 | 6.5/10 | Self-hosted LiveSync |
| Last Push | 3d ago | 62d ago | Self-hosted LiveSync |
Which Should You Pick? (Algorithmic Verdict)
Self-hosted LiveSync holds a decisive advantage with a Safety Score of 86/100 compared to Wiki.js's 67/100. This divergence stems from superior maintenance responsiveness, fewer active supply-chain alerts, and stronger automated security audits. For production deployments, Self-hosted LiveSync is the clear recommendation.
Pick Self-hosted LiveSync if:
- You prefer a TypeScript-based stack.
- You require MIT licensing terms.
- Its medium deployment fits your ops requirements.
Pick Wiki.js if:
- You prefer a JavaScript / Vue-based runtime.
- Your team works comfortably with AGPL-3.0-only.
- You value its specific community ecosystem and client support.
ADVERTISEMENTReserved Zero-CLS Placement