Plausible, Umami or Matomo: self-hosted web analytics compared 2026
Editorial note: The information in this article was compiled to the best of our knowledge at the time of publication. Technical details, prices, versions, licensing terms, and external content may change. Please verify the information provided independently, particularly before making business-critical or security-related decisions. This article does not replace individual professional, legal, or tax advice.
Audience measurement without Google and without data leaving the EU? WZ-IT sets up privacy-friendly analytics on your own infrastructure and provides managed hosting and ongoing operations. Discuss your setup
Self-hosted web analytics almost always comes down to the same three names. Comparisons usually stop at the interface and the resource footprint. Both are secondary to a question asked less often: which features do you actually get when self-hosting?
For two of the three the answer is "not all of them", and it is documented. Finding that out after setup means the decision was made on the wrong basis.
This article assesses the three by licence, feature scope when self-hosted and operational effort. All figures from the repositories and vendor pages, as of 24 August 2026.
Table of contents
- The three at a glance
- The decisive question: what self-hosting includes
- Privacy: what is default and what is not
- Operational effort and foundation
- Plausible
- Umami
- Matomo
- Which tool for which situation
- What happens when moving off Google Analytics
- How we approach this at WZ-IT
- Further guides
The three at a glance
Figures from the public repositories, as of 24 August 2026.
| Tool | GitHub stars | Licence | Foundation | Hosted offering |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Umami | 38,338 | MIT | PostgreSQL or MySQL | yes |
| Plausible | 28,730 | AGPL-3.0 | PostgreSQL and ClickHouse | yes |
| Matomo | 21,800 | GPL-3.0 | PHP and MySQL | yes |
All three repositories were updated in the days before 24 August 2026. None of the projects has stalled.
The decisive question: what self-hosting includes
This is where the three separate clearly, and it does not appear in feature lists but in the vendors' own statements about the difference between self-hosting and cloud.
Plausible Community Edition is under AGPLv3 and contains the core including the tracker. According to the vendor, several features remain with the hosted product, among them funnels, user journeys, ecommerce revenue goals, SSO, the Sites API and the stronger bot detection. The reasoning is stated openly: subscriptions fund development.
The bot detection point has the greatest practical consequence. Self-hosting means more noise from scrapers and datacenter traffic in the numbers than in the cloud.
Matomo provides everything published officially under the Matomo name as open-source and free software. Alongside that sits a marketplace of premium plugins which are explicitly not available under an open-source-compatible licence and are paid. The core is free; a portion of the functionality sits outside it.
Umami is under MIT. A separated proprietary area of the kind the other two document is not apparent in the repository. There is a hosted offering, but the feature boundary to self-hosting is not stated in comparable terms.
Practical consequence: if you need a specific feature, check which side of that boundary it sits on before deciding. With Plausible and Matomo this is a real limitation on self-hosting; with Umami, on current evidence, it is not.
Privacy: what is default and what is not
The most common reason for switching, and the one handled least precisely.
All three can be run so that no personal data is stored and no cookies are set. The difference lies in the default:
- Umami and Plausible are built from the outset for aggregate measurement without individual visitor tracking.
- Matomo logs more extensively in its standard configuration, including visitor profiles. That is deliberate, because Matomo aims to be the most complete replacement for Google Analytics, and it means privacy compliance there is a matter of configuration rather than of default.
What deliberately does not appear here: a statement on whether a consent banner is required. That depends on the specific configuration, the purpose and the legal reading, and belongs with data protection advice rather than a tool comparison. We have described the requirements for compliance in operations elsewhere.
Operational effort and foundation
| Tool | Requires | Effort |
|---|---|---|
| Umami | application plus PostgreSQL or MySQL | lowest |
| Matomo | PHP plus MySQL | moderate, grows with data volume |
| Plausible | application plus PostgreSQL and ClickHouse | highest |
Plausible brings ClickHouse, a specialised database built for querying large event volumes. That is technically sound and means an additional system for self-hosters with its own update path, backup and operational knowledge.
Umami gets by with an ordinary relational database (PostgreSQL or MySQL) that most environments already run. That is why it is the leanest entry point.
Matomo scales on PHP and MySQL and needs attention to archiving and database maintenance as data grows.
Plausible
Plausible is under AGPL-3.0 with 28,730 stars. A clear, reduced interface, built cookie-free, European vendor with EU hosting.
Cloud tiers sit at 9 US dollars per month up to 10,000 pageviews, 14 US dollars for the next tier and 19 US dollars for up to ten sites, with Enterprise on request. The Community Edition costs nothing.
Strength: the clearest interface of the three and a vendor whose positioning matches the privacy argument. Limit: the feature boundary described above and the ClickHouse foundation.
Umami
Umami is under MIT with 38,338 stars and thus the most-watched of the three on GitHub. Very lean, quickly set up, requires no specialised database.
We use Umami ourselves. The analyses with which we check the effectiveness of individual pages come from it. Two observations from that practice: operation really is uneventful, and the meaningfulness of the figures depends entirely on carrying pageviews as a denominator. Absolute event counts without one cannot be interpreted.
Strength: least effort, no apparent feature boundary for self-hosting, MIT licence. Limit: the smallest feature set of the three, no visitor profiles, no ecommerce analysis at Matomo's depth.
Matomo
Matomo is under GPL-3.0 with 21,800 stars, the oldest and most feature-rich of the three. It is the only one that largely reproduces Google Analytics: visitor profiles, ecommerce analysis at product level, form analytics, tag manager.
Strength: if you have to rebuild existing reports, this gets you furthest. Limits: higher configuration effort for privacy compliance, growing maintenance effort at large data volumes, and part of the functionality sits in paid plugins outside the free licence.
Which tool for which situation
| Starting point | Obvious choice | Reason |
|---|---|---|
| Measure reach, lowest operational effort | Umami | leanest foundation, no feature boundary |
| Largely rebuild Google Analytics reports | Matomo | the only one with comparable depth |
| Clear interface, operations should stay external | Plausible Cloud | complete features, nothing to run |
| Clear interface, operations in house | check Plausible CE | hold the feature boundary against your needs first |
| Ecommerce at product level | Matomo | revenue analysis included in the core |
What happens when moving off Google Analytics
The numbers differ, and that is normal. Ad blockers act differently, bot detection varies, and the definition of a session is not the same. Double-digit percentage deviations are common when switching.
Historical data usually does not come along. A lossless import is not the normal case with any of the three. If you need comparability across the switch, run both systems in parallel for a period and document the difference rather than explaining it away later.
Self-hosting shifts work, it does not save it. Backup, updates, availability and filtering bot traffic become your job. With Plausible the weaker bot detection when self-hosted is explicitly stated.
How we approach this at WZ-IT
We use Umami for our own analysis, because operation is lean and the questions we ask need no visitor profiles. For clients, need decides: where existing reports have to be rebuilt, Matomo is the realistic choice, higher effort included.
What we settle before every setup is the feature boundary. With Plausible and Matomo, the question of whether a needed feature sits in the free portion belongs before the installation, not after.
And regardless of tool: reach figures without a denominator mislead. We carry pageviews alongside so event counts can be interpreted at all.
Further guides
- Managed open source - setup and operation of open-source applications
- Compliance in operations - requirements beyond the tool choice
- Self-hosted PaaS compared - the platform such services run on
- Managed operations - backup, updates and monitoring under contract
Unclear whether the feature you need is included when self-hosting? We hold the requirement against the feature boundary and set up measurement that holds up. Book a call
Sources
Web analytics without Google and without a consent banner
We set up privacy-friendly audience measurement on your own infrastructure and take on operations.
Frequently Asked Questions
Answers to important questions about this topic
Plausible Community Edition is under AGPLv3 and contains the core. According to the vendor, funnels, user journeys, ecommerce revenue goals, SSO, the Sites API and the stronger bot detection remain with the hosted product. If you need those features, self-hosting will not get you there.
The core is, under GPL-3.0. Alongside it there are premium plugins on the Matomo Marketplace which are explicitly not available under an open-source-compatible licence and are paid. What belongs to the core and what does not should be checked before deciding.
Umami is under MIT, and no separated proprietary area is apparent in the repository of the kind Plausible and Matomo maintain for part of their functionality. There is also a hosted offering, but the feature boundary to self-hosting is not documented in comparable terms.
That is a legal question, not a technical one, and it depends on the specific configuration. All three can be run cookie-free and without storing personal data. Matomo logs more extensively by default than the other two, which requires adjustment. A reliable answer for a specific case comes from data protection advice, not from a tool comparison.
Plausible is under AGPL-3.0, Matomo under GPL-3.0, Umami under MIT. AGPL requires disclosure of modifications when the software is provided over a network, which is usually unproblematic for purely internal operation without redistribution.
Starter at 9 US dollars per month up to 10,000 pageviews, Growth at 14 US dollars, Business at 19 US dollars for up to ten sites, Enterprise on request. As of August 2026. Self-hosting the Community Edition is free.
Matomo comes closest and covers visitor profiles, ecommerce analysis and a tag manager. Plausible and Umami deliberately take a leaner approach and forgo individual visitor tracking. If you want to rebuild reports one-to-one you end up with Matomo; if you want manageable audience measurement, with the other two.
Umami is the leanest and needs a PostgreSQL or MySQL database alongside the application. Plausible additionally brings ClickHouse, which demands more resources and more operational knowledge. Matomo runs on PHP and MySQL and grows noticeably with the data volume.
Usually yes. A lossless import is not the normal case with any of the three. Common practice is to run both systems in parallel for a period and document the difference rather than claiming comparability across the switch.
Because counting differs. Ad blockers act differently, bot detection varies, and the definition of a session is not the same. Deviations of ten to thirty percent are normal when switching and are not an error.
Written by
Timo Wevelsiep
Co-Founder & CEO
Co-Founder of WZ-IT. Specialized in cloud infrastructure, open-source platforms and managed services for SMEs and enterprise clients worldwide.
LinkedInLet's Talk About Your Idea
Whether a specific IT challenge or just an idea - we look forward to the exchange. In a brief conversation, we'll evaluate together if and how your project fits with WZ-IT.
Arrange a callback
Companies worldwide trust WZ-IT
