matomo-org/matomo vs plausible/analytics
Both showing Healthy signals — pick on fit, not health
As of September 2026, matomo and analytics both show healthy maintenance signals. matomo was committed to 1 week ago with 13+ active contributors, while analytics was committed to 3 weeks ago with 11+ active contributors. matomo is GPL-3.0-licensed while analytics is AGPL-3.0-licensed. Neither has known critical or high-severity CVEs in its dependency tree.
Informational only. RepoPilot summarises public signals at the time of analysis. Not professional, security, or legal advice.
matomo-org/matomo
Strong maintenance signals
copyleft license (GPL-3.0) — review compatibility; dependency CVE scan unavailable
No blocking repository signals were found — inspect the evidence before forking.
Documented and popular — useful reference codebase to read through.
dependency CVE scan unavailable
- ⚠GPL-3.0 is copyleft — check downstream compatibility
- ✓Last commit today
- ✓13 active contributors
- ✓Distributed ownership (top contributor 25% of recent commits)
- ✓GPL-3.0 licensed
- ✓CI configured
- ✓Tests present
What would improve this?
- •Use as dependency Concerns to Mixed if: relicense under MIT/Apache-2.0 (rare for established libs)
Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests, cross-checked against OpenSSF Scorecard
plausible/analytics
Strong maintenance signals
copyleft license (AGPL-3.0) — review compatibility
No blocking repository signals were found — inspect the evidence before forking.
Documented and popular — useful reference codebase to read through.
Scorecard "Branch-Protection" is 1/10; Scorecard "Token-Permissions" is 0/10
- ⚠AGPL-3.0 is copyleft — check downstream compatibility
- ⚠Scorecard: default branch unprotected (1/10)
- ✓Last commit 1d ago
- ✓11 active contributors
- ✓Distributed ownership (top contributor 30% of recent commits)
- ✓AGPL-3.0 licensed
- ✓CI configured
- ✓Tests present
What would improve this?
- •Use as dependency Concerns to Mixed if: relicense under MIT/Apache-2.0 (rare for established libs)
- •Deploy as-is Mixed to Healthy if: bring "Branch-Protection" to ≥3/10 (see scorecard report)
Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests, cross-checked against dependency CVEs from deps.dev and OpenSSF Scorecard
Signal-by-signal breakdown
| matomo | analytics | |
|---|---|---|
| Stars | 21,839 | 28,736 |
| Last commit | 12d ago | 23d ago |
| License | GPL-3.0 | AGPL-3.0 |
| Open issues | 2,578 | 62 |
| Has tests | ✓ | ✓ |
| Has CI | ✓ | ✓ |
| Test coverage | 100% | 100% |
| Dependency CVEs | No CVEs | No CVEs |
| Architecture grade | C | — |
| Cycles | 0 | — |
| Bottom-line | Healthy signals | Healthy signals |
Want the full analysis? matomo-org/matomo · plausible/analytics
Ask AI about matomo-org/matomo vs plausible/analytics
Open the chat with a comparison question pre-filled.