Licensing
GitComet's open source edition is AGPL-3.0 and free for personal and commercial use, with no account. GitKraken is proprietary with a free tier and paid plans.
Compare
GitComet vs GitKraken
GitKraken is the most recognisable Git GUI, and the one most people mean by "a Git client with a graph". GitComet is newer, narrower and considerably faster on large repositories. Here is where each one wins.
Measured
GitComet and GitKraken on the Chromium repository
This is the difference that prompted GitComet to exist. On a repository the size of Chromium, GitKraken took about 25 seconds and 2 GB to become usable; GitComet took about 1 second and 265 MB.
| Client | Version | Time to open | Memory |
|---|---|---|---|
| GitComet | v0.1.6 | 1s | 265MB |
| GitFiend | v0.45.3 | 1s | 289MB |
| SourceGit | v2026.6 | 3.5s | 301MB |
| SmartGit | v25.1.110 | 18s | 4.8GB |
| GitKraken | v11.10.0 | 25s | 2GB |
| Megit | v0.10.0 | 29s | 14.4GB |
| Gittyup | v2.0.0 | 43s | 2.5GB + 1.5GB indexer |
| gitg | v44 | crashed | crashed |
| ungit | v1.5.30 | crashed | crashed |
| guitar | v1.3.1-1 | crashed | crashed |
Measured 2026-04 at the versions shown, on Linux 6.19.6-zen (x64). On a repository of a few thousand commits both clients open effectively instantly and this comparison tells you nothing useful — it only starts to matter as history and working-tree size grow.
Differences
How the two are built differently
What it talks to
GitComet is local-first: it reads your repository and nothing else, with no account and no telemetry account to create. GitKraken integrates with hosting providers and issue trackers, which is a genuine feature if you want it.
Implementation
GitComet is Rust throughout, reading repositories with gitoxide and rendering through the GPU. GitKraken is an Electron application. That is most of the difference in the numbers above.
As a merge tool
GitComet registers as your git mergetool and git difftool with one command and accepts KDiff3 and Meld arguments, so it works outside its own window. How that works.
Platforms
Both cover Linux, macOS and Windows. GitComet additionally ships native ARM64 builds for all three, and packages for apt, AUR, Gentoo GURU, Homebrew, AppImage and the Microsoft Store.
Maturity
GitKraken has been developed for a decade and shows it. GitComet is 0.1.x, moves fast, and changes between releases. Weigh that honestly against the speed.
Be fair
When GitKraken is the better choice
GitComet does not do these things, and no amount of speed compensates if you need them:
Pull request review in the client
GitComet has no hosting provider API integration at all. It cannot open, review or merge a pull request.
Issue tracker integration
No Jira, no GitHub Issues, no Trello board inside the app.
Git LFS
GitComet has no LFS support. If your repository depends on it, this is disqualifying.
FAQ
Questions about switching from GitKraken
Is GitComet a free alternative to GitKraken?
Yes. The GitComet open source edition is free for personal and commercial use under the AGPL-3.0, with no account required and no restriction on private repositories. A paid Professional edition is planned for deeper integrations, but the core client is free.
Is GitComet faster than GitKraken?
On the test we ran, yes, by a wide margin. Opening the Chromium repository on Linux took GitComet about 1 second and 265 MB, and GitKraken about 25 seconds and 2 GB, at the versions listed on this page. On a small repository the difference is not noticeable.
What does GitKraken do that GitComet does not?
GitKraken browses and reviews pull requests, integrates with issue trackers and hosting provider APIs, and offers team features GitComet has no equivalent for. GitComet is a local desktop client and does not talk to any hosting provider API.
Does GitComet run on the same platforms as GitKraken?
Both run on Linux, macOS and Windows. GitComet also ships native ARM64 builds for all three, and is distributed through apt, AUR, Gentoo GURU, Homebrew, AppImage, the Microsoft Store and GitHub Releases.