Compare
Up to three tools. The table shows the data as-is, without picking a “best”.
| Field | act | Beszel | restic |
|---|---|---|---|
| Platforms | GitHub | Universal | Universal |
| Local support | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Paid API | No | No | No |
| License | MIT | MIT | BSD-2-Clause |
| Stars | 72437 | 26480 | 36756 |
| Last activity | — | October 20, 2026 | September 25, 2026 |
| Install complexity | — | متوسط / Medium | متوسط: CLI ومستودع وجدولة منفصلة / Moderate: CLI, repository, and separate scheduling |
| Category | Testing, Git, DevOps | DevOps, Monitoring | Security, DevOps |
| Best use | Best for a developer or small team that repeatedly edits GitHub Actions workflows and wants to test a job before pushing. It provides a local run log, while a final GitHub check remains necessary. It is not suitable when exact hosted-runner parity is required. | Best for an individual developer or small team running a VPS, home server, or a few Docker hosts and needing a simple dashboard, history, and alerts. Its value is combining host and container metrics in a self-hosted hub. It is not a full logs-and-traces observability platform. | Best for an individual developer or small team that needs encrypted, testable backups of project files and exported database dumps. It works with local or remote storage and can be scheduled by the operating system. It does not replace application-consistent database exports or recovery testing. |