groups of counters for the site: webmetr, mycounter, liveinternet, statcounter, plausible and matomo

published 2026-04-19

a site counter can mean many different things. for one person it is a small picture with numbers in the footer. for another, a dashboard with heatmaps and session recordings. for the third — google analytics 4 with events, conversions and google ads. for the fourth — self-hosted matomo or plausible due to privacy. the problem is that all these products are often called the same word "analytics", although their tasks are different.

therefore, it is more useful to compare not only specific names, but groups. webmetr belongs to the group of simple counters for the site, but with a modern architecture and the old correct web idea: each report should have its own url, statistics can be public, and a visible counter can stand right on the page. it is closer to the spirit of liveinternet/mycounter, but without the russian red flag, without the old heaviness and with a normal focus on the ukrainian web.

a short conclusion

if you just want a site meter rather than an enterprise analytics suite, webmetr is the most straightforward choice. mycounter and liveinternet are old visible counters. statcounter is an international freemium analytics-counter with visitor feeds and replay. plausible and matomo are privacy/web analytics, but not old-school public counters in the first sense. clarity and hotjar — behavioral ux analytics. grafana — dashboards and observability. google analytics and adobe analytics — marketing or enterprise analytics. mixing these groups without context is wrong.

why old-school counters still make sense

old counters were popular not by chance. they were solving a very simple problem: the site owner wanted to see traffic, and the advertiser wanted to check the numbers. the small picture on the website was a signal: there are statistics here. the link from the picture led to a page where you could see views, visitors, sources, countries, browsers and pages.

the problem is not in the model itself. the problem is that many old services remain in the old web. liveinternet for the ukrainian site has a russian footprint and reputational risk. mycounter has a ukrainian domain and history, but the interface looks like a legacy of another era. statcounter is more modern, but it is a freemium saas with its own product logic and tariffs. webmetr tries to take the strength of the old approach and make it modern.

that webmetr takes from the old school and does fine

an important detail: webmetr does not try to be everything at once. it is not a grafana replacement for devops. it is not a hotjar replacement for ux-research. it is not a replacement for amplitude for product managers. it is not a replacement for adobe analytics for enterprise. webmetr is a site meter. that is why it should be quick to understand, easy to install and understandable without training.

group 1: webmetr as a new public meter

webmetr is best suited where clear traffic numbers are needed. the site owner adds a domain, receives a code and sees reports. if the statistics need to be shown to others, they can be made public. if the statistics are to be only for the owner, they remain private. it's a simple solution for sites that don't want to turn basic analytics into a separate technical project.

another important part is the dofollow link in the visible counter. it is not just a decorative picture. this is a product strategy: many sites put a counter badge, webmetr gets natural mentions and links, and the site owner gets easy access to statistics. it's honest old web mechanics that can be done neatly and modernly.

group 2: mycounter and liveinternet as legacy counters

mycounter and liveinternet are closer to the classic understanding of the counter. they have visible counter images, reports, old style menus, and a historical link to a rating or public statistics. but for a new site they bring different problems. mycounter looks old and not very product-friendly for a new user. liveinternet is a russian legacy service, so this is a red flag for a ukrainian site even before a technical discussion.

if the site still has the old meter, the best way is not to cut everything at once. you can put webmetr next to you, compare numbers for several weeks, check sources, pages and countries, and then remove what no longer meets the requirements of reputation, security and simplicity.

group 3: statcounter as an international freemium analytics-counter

statcounter is closer to modern hosted analytics. it has a free plan, visitor feeds, dashboard, email reports, session replay and paid tiers. this can be useful if you really need visitor paths, recordings or campaign analysis. but statcounter is not a pure old-school public counter in the sense that webmetr wants to be a simple counter for a public static reporting site.

for some sites, statcounter can be a normal additional tool. but if the main task is to show the site traffic to a partner, advertiser or business owner, webmetr will be simpler and closer to the task.

group 4: plausible and matomo as privacy analytics

plausible and matomo should not be perceived as direct copies of old counters. plausible focuses on simple privacy-friendly analytics, easy script and lack of adtech logic. matomo emphasizes data ownership, privacy, cloud or on-premise models, a large number of standard reports and the possibility of self-hosted control. these are strong products, but their focus is different.

if the team is thinking about privacy, compliance, data ownership and self-hosted control, plausible or matomo might be right. if the site just wants to "put a meter and show statistics", webmetr is more direct. the difference is not that one approach is good and the other is bad. the difference is which task should be closed first.

group 5: clarity and hotjar as behavioral analytics

microsoft clarity, hotjar and contentsquare-like tools answer the question "how the user behaved on the page". these are heatmaps, session recordings, scroll depth, rage clicks, frustration, surveys, feedback and ux-insights. it is useful for improving design, forms, checkout, landing pages and conversion rate. but it is not the same as a public attendance counter.

in practice webmetr and clarity can live well together. webmetr shows how many people came and from where. clarity shows what some of these people did on the page. webmetr — quantitative traffic statistics. clarity — behavioral tips. there is no need to mix them into one category.

comparison of groups by simplicity

what to choose

the main mistake when choosing a counter

the most common mistake is to choose a product based on a list of features rather than the first real task. if a site has 500 or 5,000 visitors per day, it usually does not need data warehouse, cohort analysis, product experimentation, journey orchestration and enterprise governance. he needs to know that there was more or less traffic today, which pages are being read, where people are coming from, and whether it is possible to show these numbers to others.

the second mistake is to put russian legacy code on a ukrainian site just because everyone used to do it. now it is no longer a neutral technical solution. domain, jurisdiction, reputation and trust in third-party code all matter. if you need an old-school meter, it is better to install one that does not entail unnecessary political and reputational risk.

result

groups of counters must be separated. webmetr is a simple public meter for a website. mycounter and liveinternet are legacy counters. statcounter is a freemium hosted analytics counter. plausible and matomo — privacy/web analytics. clarity and hotjar — behavior/ux analytics. google analytics and adobe analytics — marketing or enterprise analytics. grafana — observability dashboards. if you are looking specifically for a site meter, start with webmetr. other tools can be added later when the task becomes really more complex.

sources