OpenReplay vs PostHog
| Tagline | Self-hosted session replay and product analytics for web apps | All-in-one product analytics, session replay, feature flags, and A/B testing |
| Category | Product & Web Analytics | Product & Web Analytics |
| Replaces | Hotjar, Amplitude | Mixpanel, Amplitude, Hotjar, Google Analytics |
| GitHub stars | 13k | 40k |
| Language | TypeScript | Python |
| License | Apache-2.0 | MIT |
| Self-host difficulty | 5/5 Advanced | 5/5 Advanced |
| Deploy options | Kubernetes Docker Compose Manual | Docker Compose Kubernetes Manual |
| Managed hosting | ||
| Last updated | yesterday | yesterday |
| View repo | View repo |
Where each falls short
The honest trade-offs — what you give up with each, versus the proprietary tools they replace.
OpenReplay
- Self-hosting requires a Kubernetes-based multi-service stack; resource-hungry and complex to operate.
- Product-analytics features (funnels, cohorts) are less mature than Amplitude/Mixpanel.
- No traditional aggregate web-analytics dashboard; it is session-centric.
PostHog
- Self-hosting the full ClickHouse + Kafka + Postgres + Redis stack is heavy; the project actively steers smaller users toward PostHog Cloud.
- Some enterprise features live under a separate proprietary
eelicense, not pure MIT. - The all-in-one breadth means it is more complex to operate than a focused tool like Mixpanel.
Bottom line
Both are a similar lift to self-host; choose PostHog for the larger community and ecosystem. Open each guide below for deploy steps and the full feature gap.
PostHog
All-in-one product analytics, session replay, feature flags, and A/B testing