Learn how Litlyx and Umami 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.
Stars
Forks
Last commit
Repository age
License
Self-hosted
Warning: This project hasn't been updated in 5 months and might not be actively maintained anymore.
Auto-fetched .

Auto-fetched .

Umami appears to have several advantages over Litlyx, particularly in popularity, activity, maturity and licensing. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Umami significantly outpaces Litlyx in community adoption with 36,296 stars compared to 1,691 stars on GitHub. This 21.5x difference suggests Umami has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, Umami has 6,968 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
Umami shows more recent development activity with its last commit 1 day ago, while Litlyx was last updated 5 months ago. This suggests Umami is being more actively maintained.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, CSS, Typescript. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Litlyx uses SCSS, Vue, Nuxt.js while Umami leverages JSX, Next.js.
Umami has been in development longer, starting 6 years ago, compared to Litlyx which began 2 years ago. This 3.9-year head start suggests Umami may have more mature features and established processes.
Umami uses the MIT license, which is more permissive than Litlyx's Apache-2.0 license, potentially offering greater flexibility for commercial use and integration.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Web Analytics. However, they also have distinct specializations: Litlyx also focuses on Product Analytics.
Both Litlyx and Umami 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
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs