PostHog vs Umami
| Tagline | All-in-one product analytics, session replay, feature flags, and A/B testing | Simple, fast, privacy-focused web analytics in a single lightweight dashboard |
| Category | Product & Web Analytics | Product & Web Analytics |
| Replaces | Mixpanel, Amplitude, Hotjar, Google Analytics | Google Analytics |
| GitHub stars | 37k | 38k |
| Language | Python | TypeScript |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Self-host difficulty | 5/5 Advanced | 3/5 Moderate |
| Deploy options | Docker Compose Kubernetes Manual | One-Click Docker Docker Compose 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.
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.
Umami
- Deliberately minimal: no heatmaps, session replay, or deep product-analytics like funnels/retention found in Mixpanel/Amplitude.
- Event/custom-property analytics are basic compared to dedicated product-analytics tools.
- No built-in alerting or anomaly detection.
Bottom line
Choose Umami if you want the lower-effort setup; choose Umami for the larger community and ecosystem. Open each guide below for deploy steps and the full feature gap.