Learn how BillaBear and Lago differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these subscription & billing management tools is best for you.
Stars
Forks
Last commit
Repository age
Self-hosted
Auto-fetched .

Auto-fetched .

Lago appears to have several advantages over BillaBear, particularly in popularity, maturity and licensing. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Lago significantly outpaces BillaBear in community adoption with 9,785 stars compared to 747 stars on GitHub. This 13.1x difference suggests Lago has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, Lago has 621 forks, indicating moderate developer engagement.
Both projects show recent activity, with BillaBear last updated 19 days ago and Lago 17 hours ago.
BillaBear uses JavaScript, CSS, Typescript, Vue, PHP while Lago leverages Bash, Golang.
Lago has been in development longer, starting 4 years ago, compared to BillaBear which began 3 years ago. This 1.0-year head start suggests Lago may have more mature features and established processes.
Lago is licensed under AGPL-3.0, while BillaBear's license terms are not publicly specified.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Subscription & Billing Management. However, they also have distinct specializations: BillaBear also focuses on Invoicing & Payments while Lago extends into Payment Infrastructure.
Both BillaBear and Lago offer self-hosting capabilities, giving you full control over your data and infrastructure.