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

Amundsen vs Secoda.

Amundsen and Secoda both anchor in catalog & discovery — 9 dimensions differ, 1 hold. Below: posture, coverage diff, and capability matrix.

Same Catalog & discovery (primary)
Differ on DeploymentLicensePricing transparencyFree tierOSS optiondbt depthOpenLineage stanceWarehouse coverageLineage depth
1 ● Amundsen leads
3 shared
9 Secoda leads ○
● Amundsen

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

○ Secoda

AI-native data catalog, lineage, and observability from Toronto — acquired by Atlassian in December 2025 to power Rovo AI.

● 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 Secoda if

Mid-market and scaleup data teams that want one AI-native tool covering catalog, search, lineage, documentation, and basic observability rather than running separate catalog, lineage, and monitoring tools — especially teams that value a natural-language assistant for self-serve data questions and broad business-user adoption.

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.

● Secoda

Acquired by Atlassian; announced via Secoda's blog (Dec 4, 2025) and reported by TechTarget (Dec 5, 2025). Terms undisclosed. Atlassian plans to fold Secoda's semantic cataloging into its Teamwork Graph / Rovo AI and migrate it onto the Atlassian Cloud Platform over time. As of mid-2026 Secoda still operates under its own brand with the founding team aboard; near-term customer experience is said to be unchanged. Founded 2021 in Toronto (Y Combinator); ~USD 14M Series A in 2023.

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

02
Head-to-head

How each tool describes the other.

● Amundsen on Secoda

Against datahub and openmetadata, the comparison is mostly historical: both cover Amundsen's discovery core, then add business glossary, governance workflows, column-level lineage, and data quality — with active communities shipping monthly. Amundsen's remaining edge is smallness: if your entire requirement is usage-ranked table search with owners and column stats, Amundsen does that with less conceptual overhead than either successor. Against apache-atlas, Amundsen is the friendlier UX but the less-maintained codebase; Atlas persists inside Hadoop-legacy estates Amundsen never targeted. Against select-star or secoda, the trade is self-hosted OSS versus paying for a maintained SaaS that does the same search-first job.

● Secoda on Amundsen

Secoda's page doesn't directly mention Amundsen. See the Secoda detail page.

Each quote is pulled from the named tool's own "Where it fits" write-up.

03
At a glance

Spec sheet diff.

Amundsen Secoda
Vendor LF AI & Data Foundation Secoda (Atlassian)
Deployment Self-hosted only SaaS · Self-hosted
License Open source Proprietary
Pricing OSS · paid tiers Contact sales
Free tier Yes No
OSS self-host Yes No
dbt integration Plugin Native
OpenLineage Consumer None
Founded 2019 2021
HQ Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Status ● active ○ acquired

Full Amundsen pricing → Full Secoda pricing →

Both share Primary cluster: Catalog & discovery

04
Cluster strength

Each tool's center of gravity.

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

05
Coverage

Where they cover different ground.

Target personas
Both Analyst · Data engineer
Only Amundsen Platform engineer
Only Secoda Analytics engineer · Data steward · Governance lead
Company size fit
Both Mid-market · Scaleup
Only Secoda Enterprise · Startup
Warehouse coverage
Both BigQuery · Databricks · MSSQL · MySQL · Postgres · Redshift · Snowflake
Only Amundsen Athena · Trino
Only Secoda MotherDuck
Orchestrators
Both Airflow · dbt Core
Only Secoda dbt Cloud
06
Declared features

The declared feature set.

5 of 6 declared features differ — listed first. These are each tool's self-declared key_features; a blank dot means undeclared, not impossible.

Feature Amundsen Secoda
Business Glossary Catalog & discovery
PII Auto-Classification Catalog & discovery
Column-Level Lineage Lineage & metadata
Reverse Impact Analysis Lineage & metadata
Transformation Lineage Lineage & metadata
Table-Level Lineage Lineage & metadata
07
Capability matrix

Where they disagree.

Catalog & discovery

7 of 9 differ
Amundsen Secoda
Business glossary
NL search
Governance flows
Access requests
PII auto-classify
Tag propagation
Free self-host
Both also haveOwnership tracking
Neither doesData contracts

Lineage & metadata

3 of 7 differ
Amundsen Secoda
Column-level
Cross-system
Reverse impact
Both also haveBI lineage · Lineage API
Neither doesHistorical · Lineage diff
08
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 Secoda if

Mid-market and scaleup data teams that want one AI-native tool covering catalog, search, lineage, documentation, and basic observability rather than running separate catalog, lineage, and monitoring tools — especially teams that value a natural-language assistant for self-serve data questions and broad business-user adoption. A strong fit for organisations on Snowflake, BigQuery, or Databricks plus dbt and a modern BI tool who want fast time-to-value and lighter governance overhead than enterprise suites like Atlan or Collibra.

09
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

Secoda stands out for

  • [+] AI-native search and assistant as the primary interface — natural-language data questions across the catalog, plus purpose-built agents for search, documentation, observability, and governance
  • [+] Consolidated — catalog, data dictionary/glossary, column- and table-level lineage, governance, and no-code monitoring in one workspace
  • [+] Strong automated lineage including column-level, BI-tool coverage, impact analysis, and downstream/upstream owner notifications
  • [+] Fast time-to-value and broad business-user adoption relative to heavyweight enterprise catalogs, with 50+ no-code connectors
10
Other alternatives

Tools both also compete with.

All Amundsen alternatives, scored →All Secoda alternatives, scored →

A note on this comparison.

Every capability value above traces to Amundsen or Secoda'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 →