Learn how Metabase and Redash differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these data visualization tools is best for you.
Stars
Forks
Last commit
Repository age
Self-hosted
Auto-fetched .

Stars
Forks
Last commit
Repository age
License
Auto-fetched .

Both Metabase and Redash 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.
Metabase leads in popularity with 46,977 stars vs 28,526 stars for Redash. The 65% higher star count indicates stronger community adoption. In terms of developer contributions, Metabase has 6,393 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
Both projects show recent activity, with Metabase last updated 8 hours ago and Redash 4 days ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, CSS, Typescript, JSX. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Metabase uses Bash, Clojure while Redash leverages Python.
Redash has been in development longer, starting 12 years ago, compared to Metabase which began 11 years ago. This 1.3-year head start suggests Redash may have more mature features and established processes.
Redash is licensed under BSD-2-Clause, while Metabase's license terms are not publicly specified.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Data Visualization, BI Platforms.
Metabase provides self-hosting options for complete data control and customization, while Redash may be primarily cloud-based or require different deployment approaches.