Plausible.io Reviews

1. Nikola

   · Founder at Hosted Status Page · about 6 years ago
   Happy Paying User :)

   I've been using plausible since Sep 2019 and never had any doubts about it. It provides me with everything I need related to visitor stats while keeping privacy in first place.

   It doesn't slow down my website loading speed (it's amazing, it's less than 1KB in size!), is not blocked by adblockers since it's not really a tracker tracker, and owners are super cool and they actually respond to every inquiry you could possibly have.

   If you're looking for de-googling your stuff, you can start with Plausible :)

   🏁 Competitors: Google Analytics, Matomo, Woopra

   👍 Pros:    Loading speed|Clean ui|Privacy concisous|Custom domain|Affordable prices|Easy integration|Super simple
2. Makis

   · Senior Software Engineer · over 6 years ago
   Plausibly simple analytics!

   I tried several analytics tools prior to Plausible, namely Google Analytics and later on Matomo. I found both to be fairly complicated for my usage which is a personal blog. Complicated in the way I had to install and use them. Plausible's simple to set up approach combined with a very clean and inviting user interface was a breath of fresh air. It's simple and clean enough that it actually makes me want to check and analyse my traffic which is a feeling I never thought I'd have having tried alternatives.

   🏁 Competitors: Google Analytics, Simple Analytics, Matomo
3. Cesar Reyes

   · CEO at Reyes.Pro · over 6 years ago
   Excellent alternative to google analytics

   It offers clear information about what I really need, without distractions, without advertising and does not slow my site.

   🏁 Competitors: Google Analytics

Cppcheck Reviews

Plausible.io mentions (215)

• Chris Banes' Skills Repo: Claude Code Meets Android Development

  Also a small tooling aside — if you're tracking how often skills get used across your team (or just want analytics on your dev blog without the GDPR cookie banner dance), privacy-focused options like Umami or Plausible give you full data ownership and a much lighter footprint than Google Analytics. I migrated two side projects to Umami last year and haven't looked back. - Source: dev.to / 2 months ago

• Migrating Off Google Analytics: Umami vs Plausible vs Fathom

  So this post is about something I've been chewing on for months but finally moved on: ripping Google Analytics out of three side projects and picking a privacy-focused alternative. Specifically, I'll compare Umami, Plausible, and Fathom — the three I actually evaluated — and walk through the migration steps that worked for me. - Source: dev.to / 2 months ago

• Google Analytics Alternatives: Umami vs Plausible vs Fathom in 2026

  Plausible is what I recommend when someone wants to set it up and forget about it. It's an EU-based company, the data stays in the EU, and they're very transparent about their infrastructure. - Source: dev.to / 3 months ago

• Migrating from Google Analytics to Privacy-Focused Alternatives

  Plausible is also open-source with a self-hosted option, but their cloud-hosted product is where most people land. It's polished, opinionated, and genuinely pleasant to use. - Source: dev.to / 3 months ago

• Qwen 3 vs Llama 3: Configuring Local LLMs for Actual Performance

  I've been using Umami for this — it's a self-hosted, privacy-focused analytics tool that doesn't require cookie banners and is fully GDPR-compliant out of the box. Compared to alternatives like Plausible (also excellent, but their hosted plan costs more) or Fathom (hosted-only, pricier), Umami hits a sweet spot of simplicity and zero cost if you self-host. You get clean dashboards showing endpoint usage, response... - Source: dev.to / 3 months ago

Cppcheck mentions (10)

• Configuring Cppcheck, Cpplint, and JSON Lint

  I dedicated Sunday morning to going over the documentation of the linters we use in the project. The goal was to understand all options and use them in the best way for our project. Seeing their manuals side by side was nice because even very similar things are solved differently. Cppcheck is the most configurable and best documented; JSON Lint lies at the other end. - Source: dev.to / over 2 years ago

• Enforcing Memory Safety?

  Using infer, someone else exploited null-dereference checks to introduce simple affine types in C++. Cppcheck also checks for null-dereferences. Unfortunately, that approach means that borrow-counting references have a larger sizeof than non-borrow counting references, so optimizing the count away potentially changes the semantics of a program which introduces a whole new way of writing subtly wrong code. Source: about 3 years ago

• Static Code analysis

  For my own projects, I used cppcheck. You can check out that tool to get a feel. Depending on what industry your in, you might need to follow a standard like Misra. Source: over 3 years ago

• How do you not shoot yourself in the foot ?

  Https://cppcheck.sourceforge.io/ (there are many other static analysis tools, I just haven't used them or didn't care for them). Source: over 3 years ago

• Linting tool for prohibiting the use of specific std types

  Sounds like something that could simply be communicated with the team that writes the tests. Unless you have dozens of such classes. In that case, you could just use e.g. Cppcheck and add a rule (regular expression) that searches for usages of the forbidden classes. Source: over 3 years ago