Data Stack Index / v 02.06
Verified 2026·07·03
Send a correction
Compare Same primary cluster · Catalog & discovery

Amundsen vs Collibra.

Amundsen and Collibra both anchor in catalog & discovery — 7 dimensions differ, 1 hold. Below: posture, coverage diff, and capability matrix.

Same Catalog & discovery (primary)
Differ on DeploymentLicensePricing transparencyFree tierOSS optionWarehouse coverageLineage depth
1 ● Amundsen leads
3 shared
11 Collibra leads ○
● Amundsen

The Lyft-born OSS catalog that invented search-first discovery — historically important, but development has largely stalled since 2024.

○ Collibra

Enterprise data-and-AI governance incumbent: catalog, glossary, workflow stewardship, lineage, and a separate ML data-quality module.

● Pick Amundsen if

Teams that already run Amundsen and need to understand what they have, or teams with a genuinely minimal requirement — usage-ranked table search and ownership tracking, nothing more — who are comfortable owning a codebase that is no longer moving.

○ Pick Collibra if

Large, regulated enterprises — banks, insurers, pharma, public sector — that need a governance-first control plane: a real CDO function, formal stewardship, a business glossary, policy enforcement, and auditable lineage for regulations like BCBS 239, GDPR, SOX, HIPAA, and the EU AI Act.

01
Strategic posture

What each is betting on.

● Amundsen

Honest read: maintenance mode. Created at Lyft, open-sourced October 2019, joined LF AI & Data as an incubation project in August 2020. Development has slowed to near-zero — the last release was databuilder 7.5.1 (August 2024) and the last commit to the monorepo (April 2025) moved a maintainer to emeritus status. Stemma, the managed-Amundsen company founded by an Amundsen co-creator, was acquired by Teradata in 2023 and discontinued as a standalone product. The repo is not archived, but treat this as software that is no longer evolving.

● Collibra

Independent and active as of mid-2026. Founded 2008 in Brussels by VUB researchers; one of the original category-defining governance incumbents. Itself an acquirer, not a target — Raito (access management), Husprey (SQL notebook), and Deasy Labs (unstructured/AI metadata) in 2025, on top of OwlDQ (2021, now the Data Quality & Observability module). Last disclosed private valuation USD 5.25B (2021).

Each tool's current strategic narrative, verbatim from its profile.

02
At a glance

Spec sheet diff.

Amundsen Collibra
Vendor LF AI & Data Foundation Collibra
Deployment Self-hosted only SaaS only
License Open source Proprietary
Pricing OSS · paid tiers Contact sales
Free tier Yes No
OSS self-host Yes No
Founded 2019 2008
HQ Brussels, Belgium

Full Amundsen pricing → Full Collibra pricing →

Both share Primary cluster: Catalog & discovery · dbt integration: Plugin · OpenLineage: Consumer · Status: ● active

03
Cluster strength

Each tool's center of gravity.

Cluster Amundsen Collibra
Quality & testing 0/3 2/3
Lineage & metadata 1/3 3/3
Catalog & discovery 3/3primary 3/3primary
▲ Asymmetry
Collibra scores 2/3 on Quality & testing; Amundsen scores 0/3. If this cluster is the buying motion, the choice is largely made — see the Collibra capability detail.
▲ Asymmetry
Collibra scores 3/3 on Lineage & metadata; Amundsen scores 1/3. If this cluster is the buying motion, the choice is largely made — see the Collibra capability detail.

Scored 0–3 per cluster on the same rubric across all tools. A 0 means the cluster isn't the tool's focus, not that the feature is absent. See the methodology.

04
Coverage

Where they cover different ground.

Target personas
Both Data engineer
Only Amundsen Analyst · Platform engineer
Only Collibra CDO · Data steward · Governance lead
Company size fit
Both Mid-market
Only Amundsen Scaleup
Only Collibra Enterprise
Warehouse coverage
Both BigQuery · Databricks · MSSQL · Postgres · Redshift · Snowflake
Only Amundsen Athena · MySQL · Trino
Only Collibra Fabric · Synapse
Orchestrators
Both Airflow
Only Amundsen dbt Core
Only Collibra dbt Cloud
05
Declared features

The declared feature set.

8 of 8 declared features differ — listed first. These are each tool's self-declared key_features; a blank dot means undeclared, not impossible.

Feature Amundsen Collibra
Data Contracts Quality & testing
ML Anomaly Detection Quality & testing
Business Glossary Catalog & discovery
PII Auto-Classification Catalog & discovery
Column-Level Lineage Lineage & metadata
Reverse Impact Analysis Lineage & metadata
Table-Level Lineage Lineage & metadata
Transformation Lineage Lineage & metadata
06
Capability matrix

Where they disagree.

Catalog & discovery

8 of 9 differ
Amundsen Collibra
Business glossary
NL search
Data contracts
Governance flows
Access requests
PII auto-classify
Tag propagation
Free self-host
Both also haveOwnership tracking

Lineage & metadata

4 of 7 differ
Amundsen Collibra
Column-level
Cross-system
Reverse impact
Historical
Both also haveBI lineage · Lineage API
Neither doesLineage diff
07
Verdict

When to pick each.

● Pick Amundsen if

Teams that already run Amundsen and need to understand what they have, or teams with a genuinely minimal requirement — usage-ranked table search and ownership tracking, nothing more — who are comfortable owning a codebase that is no longer moving. The core idea still holds up: index tables, dashboards, and people into Elasticsearch, rank results by query-log usage so the tables analysts actually trust float to the top, and keep the UX focused on the single question "which table should I use?" Databuilder's pull model is plain Python, so extending it from an existing Airflow deployment is straightforward for a data platform team.

○ Pick Collibra if

Large, regulated enterprises — banks, insurers, pharma, public sector — that need a governance-first control plane: a real CDO function, formal stewardship, a business glossary, policy enforcement, and auditable lineage for regulations like BCBS 239, GDPR, SOX, HIPAA, and the EU AI Act. Collibra is strongest where governance process and accountability matter more than developer ergonomics, and where a single vendor for catalog plus governance plus lineage plus data quality plus AI governance is preferred over best-of-breed point tools.

08
Strengths

What each does best.

Amundsen stands out for

  • [+] Pioneered usage-ranked, search-first discovery — PageRank-style ranking from query logs remains a genuinely good idea that successors copied
  • [+] Deliberately small surface area — analysts get table search, owners, column stats, and previews without a governance platform's learning curve
  • [+] Apache-2.0 under neutral LF AI & Data governance, with nothing held back for a paid tier
  • [+] Databuilder is plain-Python ETL — custom extractors are easy to write and schedule from an existing Airflow deployment

Collibra stands out for

  • [+] The deepest governance and stewardship tooling in the cluster — a configurable workflow engine, business glossary, policies, ownership, and audit trails purpose-built for regulated enterprises
  • [+] Broad single-vendor footprint — catalog, lineage (table and column, OpenLineage-aware), an ML data-quality module (from the OwlDQ acquisition), privacy, and AI governance under one platform
  • [+] Strong automated lineage with root-cause and downstream impact analysis at table, column, and report level, with in-line transformation context
  • [+] A mature, analyst-recognised leader with 100+ catalog integrations and a large regulated-enterprise customer base
09
Other alternatives

Tools both also compete with.

All Amundsen alternatives, scored →All Collibra alternatives, scored →

A note on this comparison.

Every capability value above traces to Amundsen or Collibra's own structured spec, which links back to its source — nothing here is averaged or smoothed across the two.

Notice something inaccurate? Send a correction.

No paid placementNo vendor submissionsRankings never for sale Independence policy →