head to head · open source
Grafana Loki vs codeburn
Grafana Loki has 29,124 GitHub stars, 4,174 forks, 1,620 open issues and last shipped yesterday. codeburn has 11,682 stars, 909 forks, 45 open issues and last shipped yesterday. Grafana Loki leads on adoption by 149% (29,124 vs 11,682 stars). Grafana Loki is written in Go under AGPL-3.0; codeburn is written in TypeScript under MIT. Grafana Loki has attracted 14% as many forks as stars, codeburn 8%. Grafana Loki was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee.
Two open source projects, one decision. Both are free and self-hostable — the differences are community size, license terms, language stack and release pace.
← all 20902 open source comparisons
Side by side
| Grafana Loki | codeburn | |
|---|---|---|
| GitHub stars | ★ 29K | ★ 12K |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Written in | Go | TypeScript |
| Last push | 2026-11-04 | 2026-11-04 |
| Forks | ⑂ 4.2K | ⑂ 909 |
| Self-hosting | Yes | Yes |
| Data ownership | Your server | Your server |
pick Grafana Loki if
- You weight community size — 29K stars and counting
- You want the AGPL-3.0 license terms
- Your stack matches Go
- You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance
pick codeburn if
- You want the codeburn feature set and don't need the biggest community
- You prefer the MIT license terms
- Your stack matches TypeScript
- You evaluated both and codeburn fits your workflow better
About Grafana Loki
Loki: like Prometheus, but for logs. Loki is a horizontally scalable, highly available, multi tenant log aggregation system inspired by Prometheus. It is designed to be very cost effective and easy to operate. It does not index the contents of the logs, but rather a set of labels for each log stream. Compared to other log aggregation systems, Loki: does not do full text indexing on logs. By storing compressed, unstructured logs and only indexing metadata, Loki is simpler to operate and cheaper to run. indexes and groups log streams using the same labels you’re already using with Prometheus, enabling you to…
read the full Grafana Loki overview →
About codeburn
See where your AI spend goes. If CodeBurn shows you something your bill never did, star the repo so other developers find it, and consider sponsoring to keep 41 integrations honest. npx codeburn To keep it: npm install g codeburn or brew install codeburn . Needs Node.js 22.13+. Desktop app 0.9.25. The macOS builds are signed with a Developer ID and notarized by Apple. The problem Your bill gives you a month total. It does not break that down by project, by model or by task, and it does not show which part of it was wasted. Claude Code, Codex, Cursor and the rest each write a session file every time you use them…
read the full codeburn overview →
More in Infrastructure & Operations
Related comparisons
More Monitoring & Observability projects
Compare either of these against the rest of the Monitoring & Observability field.
Frequently asked questions
Is Grafana Loki or codeburn more popular?
Grafana Loki has 29,124 GitHub stars and codeburn has 11,682. Grafana Loki has the larger community by that measure.
Are Grafana Loki and codeburn free?
Both are open source. Grafana Loki is licensed under AGPL-3.0 and codeburn under MIT. Neither carries a licence fee.
What is the difference between Grafana Loki and codeburn?
Grafana Loki is written in Go and codeburn in TypeScript. The practical differences are community size, licence terms, language stack and release cadence — all compared in the table above.
Which should I choose, Grafana Loki or codeburn?
Choose Grafana Loki if you want the larger community (29,124 stars) or its AGPL-3.0 licence terms. Choose codeburn if its feature set, stack or MIT licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.