Atomic Server vs TeamMapper
Both are self-hosted knowledge management tools projects. This page compares how well each one is actually maintained — the part you cannot see from a feature list.
| Atomic Server | TeamMapper | |
|---|---|---|
| Health score | 82/100 | 46/100 |
| Commits (11 mo) | 1227 | 148 |
| Commits (last 3 mo) | 891 | 1 |
| Stars | 1.6k | 502 |
| Latest release | 17 Sept 2026 | 26 Sept 2026 |
| Licence | MIT | MIT |
| Built with | Docker, Rust | Docker, Nodejs |
| Typical RAM | 1 GB | 1 GB |
Atomic Server
Knowledge graph database with documents (similar to Notion), tables, search, and a powerful linked data API. Lightweight, very fast and no runtime dependencies.
High commit volume, frequent releases and growing activity.
Commit activity more than 83% of tracked projects; popularity more than 43%. How this is calculated.
Commits, last 11 months
TeamMapper
Host and create your own mindmaps. Share your mindmap sessions with your team and collaborate live on mindmaps.
Activity has dropped noticeably. Check the repository before committing to it.
Commit activity more than 38% of tracked projects; popularity more than 23%. How this is calculated.
Commits, last 11 months
How to read this
Everything above is measured, not opinion: commit counts and release dates come from the public repositories, and the health score ranks each project against all 1352 projects we track. Read the full method.
What this comparison deliberately does not do is tell you which has the better feature set. Maintenance health tells you which project will still be receiving security fixes in two years. Decide that first, then compare features on the projects that survive the filter.
See every option in this category: self-hosted knowledge management tools.