Highlight vs OpenReplay: which one to choose in 2026?
Both are open source alternatives to LogRocket. We compare license, tech stack and features to help you decide which fits your team best.
| Highlight | OpenReplay | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Web Analytics | Web Analytics |
| License | Apache-2.0 | Apache-2.0 |
| GitHub stars | ~7k | ~12k |
| Tech stack | Go, TypeScript, PostgreSQL, ClickHouse | Go, React, PostgreSQL, ClickHouse |
| Replaces | LogRocket | LogRocket, FullStory |
OpenReplay has more GitHub stars, which usually indicates a larger community (not necessarily that it's the best option for your use case).
Highlight
Sessions, errors and logs in one platform, an alternative to LogRocket.
ℹ️ There's no pullable highlight/highlight-backend image: Highlight's official deployment requires cloning its repo with submodules and building the image on your own server (docker compose up -d --build), not pulling a published image. Follow Highlight's official self-hosting guide.
Pros
- Unifies frontend and backend in a single tool
Things to consider
- Production stack has several services to maintain
OpenReplay
Session recording and heatmaps, an alternative to LogRocket.
ℹ️ There's no pullable openreplay/openreplay-quickstart image — OpenReplay's real deployment uses several services (Postgres, ClickHouse, Valkey, object storage, and the app's own services) managed by its official installer, not a single container. Follow OpenReplay's official self-hosting guide for a deployment that actually works.
Pros
- No limit on recorded sessions when self-hosted
Things to consider
- Real production installation requires several microservices
Key features
Highlight
- Full-stack session replay
- Frontend and backend error monitoring
- Centralized logs
OpenReplay
- Session recording and replay
- Heatmaps and performance metrics
- Console error capture
Already know which one you prefer?
Add it to your Stack Builder and generate a ready-to-deploy docker-compose.yml alongside the rest of your stack.
Go to Stack Builder