plausible vs fathom
The short version
- Both are cookie-less, lightweight, one-page dashboards built as an honest reaction to Google Analytics. Neither is the wrong choice
- Plausible is open source and self-hostable, and has a shallow funnel feature (goal sequences). Fathom is closed-source and leans harder on "set and forget", with a live-visitors feed and permanent data retention
- Fathom has no funnel or sequence feature at all, not even a shallow one. If a funnel is the actual question, Fathom was not built to answer it
- Pricing is close: both charge by monthly pageviews, Plausible starting a little cheaper, Fathom including far more sites at the entry tier
- If the real question is how far visitors get through one specific flow, and what any one of them did, neither tool goes that deep. That's a different, narrower product, and it's fine to run one alongside either
Plausible and Fathom answer the same complaint: Google Analytics is too much dashboard for a question most site owners actually have, which is "how's the site doing, in about thirty seconds". Both are cookie-less, both fit on one page, both are genuinely simple rather than simple-until-you-dig-in. Picking between them comes down to a short list of real differences, not a marketing gap.
What they agree on
Start with the ground they share, because it's most of the decision. Both are first-party and cookie-less, so neither gates its count behind a consent wall the way Google Analytics does. Both put the numbers you actually check on one screen instead of behind a report builder. Both are aimed at the same buyer: someone who wants an honest visitor count and doesn't want to learn a query language to get it.
Neither one autocaptures everything and lets you sort it out later. You get top pages, referrers, and a handful of custom goals or events you define yourself. That's a deliberate choice both companies made, not a limitation either one is trying to grow out of.
Where Plausible pulls ahead
Open source and self-hostable. Plausible's code is public under AGPL, and the Community Edition runs on your own infrastructure if data ownership is a hard requirement rather than a preference. Fathom is closed-source with no self-hosting option, full stop.
A shallow funnel feature actually exists. On Plausible's Business plan you can build a funnel of two to eight steps from pageview and custom-event goals, run it in sequential or strict order, and see the drop-off at each step. It's aggregate-only (no per-visitor view, which is a privacy position rather than an oversight) and the steps are limited to what a goal can express, but it's a real feature, not marketing language stretched over a goal count.
Where Fathom pulls ahead
It leans hardest into "set and forget". A live-visitors feed shows who's on the site right now, and paid plans keep data forever rather than on a 3-to-5-year retention window. If the job is "install it and never think about it again", that posture is the whole pitch.
Multi-site management is built in from the entry tier. Fifty or more sites on one account even at the cheapest plan, which is aimed squarely at agencies and anyone running a portfolio of small sites rather than one product with one funnel.
The one feature that separates them completely
This is the part most comparisons of these two tools skip, and it's worth being precise about because it's a real capability gap rather than a matter of taste.
Plausible has funnels, even if a shallow, aggregate-only version of them. Fathom does not, and it isn't close: Fathom tracks "custom events" (its name for a goal, like a signup or a sale) as flat, fully aggregated counts, with no sequence of steps, no drop-off between them, and no per-visitor view of any kind. That's confirmed directly against Fathom's own feature page as of 2026-08-28, not an inference from a marketing page. If a funnel, in any form, is part of what you're looking for, Plausible has one and Fathom does not.
Pricing, checked on 2026-08-28
Both charge by monthly pageviews rather than by seat or by event, which keeps the bill predictable in the way that matters most: it doesn't move because your team grew.
| Plausible | Fathom | |
|---|---|---|
| Entry price | $9/mo | $15/mo |
| Entry tier includes | 10k pageviews, up to 10 sites | 100k pageviews, 50+ sites |
| Funnels | Business plan, from $19/mo | Not available at any tier |
| Free tier | None, 30-day trial | None, 7-day trial |
| Open source / self-hosting | Yes | No |
Prefer the shape of these numbers to the exact figures if you're reading this months from now: pricing pages change, and Plausible's own pricing and Fathom's own pricing are the source to check rather than a comparison article, this one included.
How to pick between them
If data ownership or self-hosting is a genuine requirement rather than a nice-to-have, that's Plausible, and nothing else on this page should move you off it. If you manage a handful of small sites and want them on one account with the least possible ongoing attention, that's Fathom's whole design.
If neither of those is true and you just want the honest, cookie-less version of "how's the site doing", they're close enough that either is a fine choice, and the shallow funnel on Plausible's Business plan is worth having if a simple goal sequence is all you need.
Where a third, narrower tool fits
Here's the honest edge case both of these tools share: neither was built to answer "how far did visitors from this campaign get through my signup flow, and what did the ones who left do instead?" Plausible's funnel gets you the drop-off between goals in aggregate. Fathom doesn't have the feature at all. Neither shows you one visitor's actual path, because staying aggregate-only is a privacy position both companies made on purpose, not something either one is about to change.
That's genuinely a different, narrower question than "how's the site doing", and it's the one Tiny Funnel exists to answer: one funnel, drawn by clicking through your own flow rather than defining goals first, with per-visitor journeys, per-step conditions, and steps a backend event can confirm. It's just as simple as either tool above, pointed at a single obsession instead of the whole site. The Plausible comparison and the Fathom comparison go through the specifics of running it alongside either one, because that's the realistic outcome for most people reading this: keep whichever of these two you already trust for the site, and add a funnel tool next to it for the one flow you keep asking about.
Frequently asked questions
Is Plausible or Fathom better for privacy?
Both are cookie-less and first-party with strong, earned reputations. Plausible is open source and EU-hosted; Fathom offers EU data isolation and shows zero personal information on its dashboards by design. Neither is meaningfully more private than the other; the differences that matter are self-hosting and multi-site management, not privacy posture.
Does Plausible have funnels?
Yes, on the Business plan: two to eight steps built from pageview or custom-event goals, run sequentially or strictly, with drop-off shown per step. It's aggregate-only, with no per-visitor view.
Does Fathom have funnels?
No. Fathom's custom events are flat, fully aggregated counts with no sequence of steps and no drop-off between them.
Can I run Plausible or Fathom alongside a funnel-specific tool?
Yes, and for most teams reading this comparison that's the practical answer. Neither script conflicts with another cookie-less tool, and they're answering different questions: one how the whole site is doing, the other how one specific flow performs and who makes it through.
Which one is cheaper?
Plausible starts a little cheaper at $9/mo against Fathom's $15/mo, but Fathom includes far more sites at that entry tier. If you run one site, compare the entry prices directly. If you run several, Fathom's multi-site allowance likely changes the comparison.
The honest answer
Both tools did the same good thing: they took Google Analytics' complexity and consent problems and built something a non-specialist can read in under a minute. Pick Plausible if self-hosting matters or you want the shallow funnel feature included. Pick Fathom if you're running several small sites and want the least possible upkeep. Either way, if the real question turns out to be a funnel rather than a dashboard, that's a narrower tool you add next to whichever one you keep, not a reason to leave.