Learn how Langfuse and **OpenLIT ** differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these llm observability & evaluation tools is best for you.

Both Langfuse and **OpenLIT ** 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.
Langfuse significantly outpaces **OpenLIT ** in community adoption with 32,209 stars compared to 2,658 stars on GitHub. This 12.1x difference suggests Langfuse has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, Langfuse has 3,454 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
Both projects show recent activity, with Langfuse last updated 7 hours ago and **OpenLIT ** 2 days ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, CSS, Bash, Typescript, JSX, Next.js. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: **OpenLIT ** leverages Python, Golang, C, Objective-C.
Both projects started around the same time, with Langfuse beginning 3 years ago and **OpenLIT ** 3 years ago.
**OpenLIT ** is licensed under Apache-2.0, while Langfuse's license terms are not publicly specified.
Both tools serve similar use cases in LLM Observability & Evaluation.
Langfuse provides self-hosting options for complete data control and customization, while **OpenLIT ** may be primarily cloud-based or require different deployment approaches.

vs
Activity score
Stars
Forks
Last commit
Activity score
Stars
Forks
Last commit
Repository age
Repository age
Version
Self-hosted
Repository
License
Repository