Learn how Helicone and Spanlens differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these llm observability & evaluation is best for you.
Last 30 days
Last commit
Repository age
Version
License
Repository
Last 30 days
Last commit
Repository age
License
Self-hosted
Repository

Both Helicone and Spanlens have their unique strengths and serve similar purposes effectively. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Helicone significantly outpaces Spanlens in community adoption with 6,084 stars compared to 12 stars on GitHub. This 507.0x difference suggests Helicone has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, Helicone has 655 forks, indicating moderate developer engagement.
Both projects show recent activity, with Helicone last updated 3 days ago and Spanlens 18 hours ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, CSS, Bash, Typescript, JSX, Python, Next.js.
Helicone has been in development longer, starting 4 years ago, compared to Spanlens which began 4 months ago. This 3.3-year head start suggests Helicone may have more mature features and established processes.
Spanlens uses the MIT license, which is more permissive than Helicone's Apache-2.0 license, potentially offering greater flexibility for commercial use and integration.
Both tools serve similar use cases in LLM Observability & Evaluation.
Spanlens provides self-hosting options for complete data control and customization, while Helicone may be primarily cloud-based or require different deployment approaches.