Learn how Logseq and Memos differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these note-taking tools is best for you.
Last 30 days
Last commit
9 hours agoRepository age
6 yearsVersion
2.0.2License
AGPL-3.0Self-hosted
YesRepository
logseq/logseq
Last 30 days
Last commit
1 day agoRepository age
5 yearsVersion
v0.31.0License
MITSelf-hosted
YesRepository
usememos/memos
Both Logseq and Memos have their unique strengths and serve similar purposes effectively. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Both tools have similar popularity levels, with Logseq having 45,347 stars and Memos having 64,025 stars on GitHub. In terms of developer contributions, Memos has 4,882 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
Memos is growing faster, adding 740 stars in the last 30 days (+1.2%) against adding 314 stars for Logseq (+0.7%). Memos is both larger and pulling further ahead.
Both projects show recent activity, with Logseq last updated 9 hours ago and Memos 1 day ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, CSS, Bash, Typescript, JSX. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Logseq uses C, Objective-C, Java, Swift, Kotlin, MATLAB, Clojure while Memos leverages Golang.
Logseq has been in development longer, starting 6 years ago, compared to Memos which began 5 years ago. This 1.6-year head start suggests Logseq may have more mature features and established processes.
Memos uses the MIT license, which is more permissive than Logseq's AGPL-3.0 license, potentially offering greater flexibility for commercial use and integration.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Note-Taking, Personal Knowledge Management (PKM). However, they also have distinct specializations: Memos extends into Secure & Encrypted Notes.
Both Logseq and Memos 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