Learn how Rybbit 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
Auto-fetched .

Auto-fetched .

Umami appears to have several advantages over Rybbit, particularly in popularity, maturity, licensing and features. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Umami significantly outpaces Rybbit in community adoption with 36,296 stars compared to 12,005 stars on GitHub. This 3.0x 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.
Both projects show recent activity, with Rybbit last updated 2 days ago and Umami 1 day ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, CSS, Typescript, JSX, Next.js. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Rybbit uses Bash.
Umami has been in development longer, starting 6 years ago, compared to Rybbit which began 1 year ago. This 4.6-year head start suggests Umami may have more mature features and established processes.
Umami uses the MIT license, which is more permissive than Rybbit's AGPL-3.0 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: Rybbit also focuses on Product Analytics.
Umami provides self-hosting options for complete data control and customization, while Rybbit may be primarily cloud-based or require different deployment approaches.
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