Actual vs Fava
| Tagline | Local-first zero-sum budgeting app with optional cross-device sync | Web frontend for Beancount text-based double-entry accounting |
| Category | Finance & Budgeting | Finance & Budgeting |
| Replaces | YNAB, Mint | Mint, QuickBooks |
| GitHub stars | 27k | 2.5k |
| Language | Nodejs | Python |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Self-host difficulty | 2/5 Easy | 2/5 Easy |
| Deploy options | Docker Docker Compose Manual | Manual |
| Managed hosting | ||
| Last updated | today | 2 days ago |
| View repo | View repo |
Where each falls short
The honest trade-offs — what you give up with each, versus the proprietary tools they replace.
Actual
- Bank sync coverage is narrower than YNAB's direct connections, especially outside the US/EU
- No mobile native app; the web app is mobile-responsive but not fully optimised for touch
- Investment tracking and net-worth projections are basic compared to Mint/Quicken
- Multi-currency support is limited and requires manual workarounds
Fava
- All data entry is in plain-text Beancount syntax; no GUI transaction entry out of the box
- No automatic bank import; requires manual or third-party import scripts
- Steep learning curve for Beancount format and double-entry concepts
- No mobile app; purely browser-based
Bottom line
Both are a similar lift to self-host; choose Actual for the larger community and ecosystem. Actual has seen more recent development. Open each guide below for deploy steps and the full feature gap.