PostHog vs Shynet
| Tagline | All-in-one product analytics, session replay, feature flags, and A/B testing | Privacy-first web analytics with no cookies and no tracking scripts |
| Category | Product & Web Analytics | Product & Web Analytics |
| Replaces | Mixpanel, Amplitude, Hotjar, Google Analytics | Google Analytics, Hotjar |
| GitHub stars | 35k | 2.9k |
| Language | Python | Python |
| License | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| Self-host difficulty | 5/5 Advanced | 2/5 Easy |
| Deploy options | Docker Compose Kubernetes Manual | Docker Docker Compose Manual |
| Managed hosting | ||
| Last updated | 5 days ago | 1 month ago |
| View repo | View repo |
Where each falls short
The honest trade-offs — what you give up with each, versus the proprietary tools they replace.
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.
Shynet
- No funnel or cohort analysis; purely page-level metrics
- No JavaScript event tracking without custom integration
- No built-in alerting or anomaly detection
Bottom line
Choose Shynet if you want the lower-effort setup; choose PostHog for the larger community and ecosystem. PostHog has seen more recent development. 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