Learn how Grafana Loki and OpenObserve differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these log management 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

Both Grafana Loki and OpenObserve have their unique strengths and serve similar purposes effectively. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Both tools have similar popularity levels, with Grafana Loki having 28,784 stars and OpenObserve having 21,466 stars on GitHub. In terms of developer contributions, Grafana Loki has 4,093 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
OpenObserve is growing faster, adding 1,079 stars in the last 30 days (+5.3%) against adding 63 stars for Grafana Loki (+0.2%). OpenObserve is the smaller project of the two, so it is closing the gap rather than extending a lead.
Both projects show recent activity, with Grafana Loki last updated 9 hours ago and OpenObserve 11 hours ago.
Grafana Loki has been in development longer, starting 8 years ago, compared to OpenObserve which began 4 years ago. This 4.9-year head start suggests Grafana Loki may have more mature features and established processes.
Both projects use the AGPL-3.0 license, providing identical terms for usage and distribution.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Log Management. However, they also have distinct specializations: OpenObserve extends into Performance Monitoring (APM).
Both Grafana Loki and OpenObserve offer self-hosting capabilities, giving you full control over your data and infrastructure.