Cloudbeds vs Metabase

Cloudbeds and Metabase both appear on the Smoower Developer Ecosystem Index.

Metabase (rank #163) holds a meaningful lead over Cloudbeds (rank #727) on the overall Smoower ecosystem score (51 vs 30). The gap of 21 points reflects composite signals across code, docs, community and reach.

On code quality (the state of repositories, tests, releases and polish), Metabase is slightly ahead of Cloudbeds. On education (docs, guides and learning material for developers), Metabase is ahead of Cloudbeds. On community (issue response, PR reviews and discussion health), Metabase is ahead of Cloudbeds. On reach (how visible the ecosystem is beyond its own repos), Metabase is clearly ahead of Cloudbeds. On momentum (release cadence and how fast the ecosystem moves), Metabase is clearly ahead of Cloudbeds.

Cloudbeds carries 49 GitHub stars across 29 public repos, with 9 repositories active in the last 90 days and 3 external contributors on record. Metabase shows 50,344 stars across 100 public repos, 20 active in the last 90 days and 47 external contributors. The star gap on its own does not decide the comparison, but Metabase's footprint is roughly 1027.4x larger, which usually shows up in downstream signals like inbound issues and third party integrations.

Cloudbeds is worth a look for teams already invested in its stack. Metabase looks better where momentum is the deciding factor. The table below breaks the scores down pillar by pillar; the linked profiles cover the underlying repos, docs and community signals in full.