Learn how DataLens and Evidence differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these data visualization 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
Self-hosted
Repository

Evidence appears to have several advantages over DataLens, particularly in popularity, growth, maturity and licensing. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Evidence significantly outpaces DataLens in community adoption with 6,877 stars compared to 1,698 stars on GitHub. This 4.1x difference suggests Evidence has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, Evidence has 399 forks, indicating moderate developer engagement.
Evidence is growing faster, adding 103 stars in the last 30 days (+1.5%) against adding 4 stars for DataLens (+0.2%). Evidence is both larger and pulling further ahead.
Both projects show recent activity, with DataLens last updated 1 day ago and Evidence 5 hours ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: DataLens uses Bash, Python while Evidence leverages CSS, Typescript, SvelteKit.
Evidence has been in development longer, starting 5 years ago, compared to DataLens which began 3 years ago. This 2.4-year head start suggests Evidence may have more mature features and established processes.
Evidence uses the MIT license, which is more permissive than DataLens's Apache-2.0 license, potentially offering greater flexibility for commercial use and integration.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Data Visualization, BI Platforms.
Both DataLens and Evidence offer self-hosting capabilities, giving you full control over your data and infrastructure.
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs