Learn how Airbyte and Mage differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these etl & data integration tools is best for you.
Last 30 days
Last commit
Repository age
Version
License
Self-hosted
Repository

Last 30 days
Last commit
Repository age
Version
License
Repository

Airbyte appears to have several advantages over Mage, particularly in popularity, growth, maturity and features. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Airbyte leads in popularity with 21,921 stars vs 8,804 stars for Mage. The 149% higher star count indicates stronger community adoption. In terms of developer contributions, Airbyte has 5,321 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
Airbyte is growing faster, adding 261 stars in the last 30 days (+1.2%) against adding 32 stars for Mage (+0.4%). Airbyte is both larger and pulling further ahead.
Both projects show recent activity, with Airbyte last updated 11 hours ago and Mage 6 days ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, CSS, Bash, Typescript, JSX, Python. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Airbyte uses Java, Kotlin while Mage leverages Next.js, SCSS, R.
Airbyte has been in development longer, starting 6 years ago, compared to Mage which began 4 years ago. This 1.8-year head start suggests Airbyte may have more mature features and established processes.
The projects use different licenses: Airbyte is licensed under Elastic-2.0 while Mage uses Apache-2.0. Consider the licensing requirements when choosing for your project.
Both tools serve similar use cases in ETL & Data Integration. However, they also have distinct specializations: Airbyte also focuses on Change Data Capture (CDC) while Mage extends into Workflow Orchestration.
Airbyte provides self-hosting options for complete data control and customization, while Mage may be primarily cloud-based or require different deployment approaches.