head to head · open source
OpenObserve vs evo
OpenObserve has 22,777 GitHub stars, 1,179 forks, 598 open issues and last shipped yesterday. evo has 4,356 stars, 805 forks, 7 open issues and last shipped 6 days ago. OpenObserve leads on adoption by 423% (22,777 vs 4,356 stars). OpenObserve is written in TypeScript under AGPL-3.0; evo is written in Python under GPL-3.0. OpenObserve has attracted 5% as many forks as stars, evo 18%. OpenObserve was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee. The two share 1 topic tag (metrics), so they are genuine substitutes rather than adjacent tools.
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
| OpenObserve | evo | |
|---|---|---|
| GitHub stars | ★ 23K | ★ 4.4K |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | GPL-3.0 |
| Written in | TypeScript | Python |
| Last push | 2026-11-04 | 2026-10-30 |
| Forks | ⑂ 1.2K | ⑂ 805 |
| Self-hosting | Yes | Yes |
| Data ownership | Your server | Your server |
pick OpenObserve if
- You weight community size — 23K stars and counting
- You want the AGPL-3.0 license terms
- Your stack matches TypeScript
- You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance
pick evo if
- You want the evo feature set and don't need the biggest community
- You prefer the GPL-3.0 license terms
- Your stack matches Python
- You evaluated both and evo fits your workflow better
About OpenObserve
Open source Datadog alternative for logs, metrics, traces, and frontend monitoring. Modern observability platform: 10x easier, 140x lower storage cost, high performance, petabyte scale. Cloud · Documentation · Slack · Quickstart OpenObserve (O2) is a cloud native observability platform for logs, metrics, traces, analytics, Real User Monitoring (RUM), and AI/LLM observability. It's a cost effective alternative to Datadog, Splunk, and Elasticsearch for teams that need full observability without the complexity or cost — with Parquet columnar storage and an S3 native design that cuts storage costs by up to 140x…
read the full OpenObserve overview →
About evo
evo Python package for the evaluation of odometry and SLAM This package provides executables and a small library for handling, evaluating and comparing the trajectory output of odometry and SLAM algorithms. Supported trajectory formats: 'TUM' trajectory files 'KITTI' pose files 'EuRoC MAV' (.csv groundtruth and TUM trajectory file) ROS and ROS2 bagfile with geometry msgs/PoseStamped , geometry msgs/TransformStamped , geometry msgs/PoseWithCovarianceStamped , geometry msgs/PointStamped or nav msgs/Odometry topics or TF messages See here for more infos about the formats. Why? evo has several advantages over other…
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 OpenObserve or evo more popular?
OpenObserve has 22,777 GitHub stars and evo has 4,356. OpenObserve has the larger community by that measure.
Are OpenObserve and evo free?
Both are open source. OpenObserve is licensed under AGPL-3.0 and evo under GPL-3.0. Neither carries a licence fee.
What is the difference between OpenObserve and evo?
OpenObserve is written in TypeScript and evo in Python. The practical differences are community size, licence terms, language stack and release cadence — all compared in the table above.
Which should I choose, OpenObserve or evo?
Choose OpenObserve if you want the larger community (22,777 stars) or its AGPL-3.0 licence terms. Choose evo if its feature set, stack or GPL-3.0 licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.