Learn how Countly and Vemetric differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these web analytics is best for you.
Last 30 days
Last commit
5 hours agoRepository age
14 yearsVersion
25.03.56-LTSLicense
OtherSelf-hosted
YesRepository
countly-server
Last 30 days
Last commit
10 hours agoRepository age
1 yearLicense
AGPL-3.0Repository
vemetric/vemetric
Countly appears to have several advantages over Vemetric, particularly in popularity, growth, maturity and features. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Countly significantly outpaces Vemetric in community adoption with 5,921 stars compared to 392 stars on GitHub. This 15.1x difference suggests Countly has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, Countly has 983 forks, indicating moderate developer engagement.
Countly is growing faster, adding 14 stars in the last 30 days (+0.2%) against losing 1 stars for Vemetric (-0.3%). Countly is both larger and pulling further ahead.
Both projects show recent activity, with Countly last updated 5 hours ago and Vemetric 10 hours ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, Typescript. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Countly uses Bash while Vemetric leverages JSX.
Countly has been in development longer, starting 14 years ago, compared to Vemetric which began 1 year ago. This 13.2-year head start suggests Countly may have more mature features and established processes.
The projects use different licenses: Countly is licensed under Other while Vemetric uses AGPL-3.0. Consider the licensing requirements when choosing for your project.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Web Analytics, Product Analytics.
Countly provides self-hosting options for complete data control and customization, while Vemetric may be primarily cloud-based or require different deployment approaches.
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs