Open-source ClickFunnels alternatives in 2026, compared honestly

Every comparison of this kind is written by someone with a stake in the outcome. I have one: I build Autonnel, which is on this list. So instead of asking you to trust my judgement, I am going to hand you the commands I used and a date, and you can re-run any claim here yourself.

Every fact below was checked on 2026-08-03. Licence claims come from the project’s own licence file, not from its marketing page. That distinction turns out to matter a lot.

The one column most comparisons skip

“Open source” appears on a lot of funnel-builder homepages. It is not a regulated term, and in this category it gets used for at least four different arrangements:

• An OSI-approved licence (Apache-2.0, MIT, GPL). You can use it, modify it, redistribute it, and run it for paying clients without asking anyone.
• Fair-code or source-available. You can read the code. The licence carves out commercial use, usually at exactly the point where you start running it for other people.
• A public repository with no licence file at all. Readable, but legally not reusable: copyright still applies and no rights are granted.
• A free plugin with a proprietary paid add-on. The free half is genuinely GPL. The half that contains the funnel features is not.

If you are a solo store owner running one shop, three of those four feel identical. If you are a freelancer or an agency building funnels for clients, the difference is the entire deal.

Here is how to check any of them in about five seconds:

# What licence does GitHub actually see in the repo?
curl -s https://api.github.com/repos/OWNER/REPO | grep spdx_id

# Does the repository the marketing page links to even exist?
curl -o /dev/null -w "%{http_code}\n" https://api.github.com/repos/OWNER/REPO

# What licence does a WordPress plugin ship under?
curl -s https://plugins.svn.wordpress.org/SLUG/trunk/readme.txt | grep -i '^License'

The projects

Launchtic

Positioned as “the open-source alternative to ClickFunnels”, and the word “open-source” appears a dozen times on the homepage. The licence is Fair-code, under a Sustainable Use License, which their own pricing page summarises as: “Pay only if you’re running Launchtic for clients.” The Agency tier is $997 per year.

The repository their site links to, github.com/launchtic/launchtic, returned 404 from the GitHub API when I checked.

I want to be careful here, because “not real open source” is the kind of accusation that generates more heat than light. Fair-code is a legitimate business model. n8n built an excellent company on it, and it is arguably more sustainable than pure permissive licensing. Launchtic is not doing anything dishonest by choosing it.

But it is not OSI open source, and the practical consequence is concrete: if you are a freelancer who builds funnels for three clients, the free tier does not cover you. That is a $997/year line item that the word “open-source” on the homepage does not prepare you for. Read the licence before you build a business on it.

openfunnels (aialvi/openfunnels)

MIT licensed, 16 stars, created 2025-07-12, last pushed 2026-07-29. Genuinely open source, genuinely maintained, and genuinely the top organic result for “funnel builder open source” at the moment.

It is a younger and much smaller project than the commercial options, and you should evaluate it as such. But MIT with an active commit history and no commercial carve-out is exactly what most people mean when they type “open source funnel builder” into a search box. If your requirements are modest, start here before you start anywhere else.

funnel-flow (sanurb/funnel-flow)

6 stars, last commit June 2024, and no licence file. GitHub’s API reports no SPDX identifier at all.

This one is a trap worth naming explicitly, because it ranks well and looks like an option. A public repository without a licence is readable but not reusable: under default copyright, nobody but the author has the right to copy, modify, or distribute it. Treat it as a reference implementation to learn from, not as something to build a store on.

CartFlows, FunnelKit, WPFunnels

All three are WordPress plugins with a free core in the plugin directory and a proprietary paid add-on. All three are real products with real users, and for a store already running WooCommerce they are the pragmatic default.

Their free plugins are GPL, but not the same GPL, which surprised me when I checked:

cartflows        License: GPLv2 or later
funnel-builder   License: GPLv3          (this is FunnelKit)
wpfunnels        License: GPLv2 or later

Worth knowing if you plan to combine code from them, since GPLv3 is not backwards compatible with GPLv2-only code.

The more important caveat is the shape of the offer rather than the version number. The free plugin is GPL; the add-on that unlocks one-click upsells, order bumps and the A/B testing is a separate proprietary download gated behind a subscription key. “CartFlows is GPL” is true of the half you do not pay for and misleading about the half you do.

When to pick one anyway: if your site is already WordPress, your team already knows wp-admin, and your page builder is already Elementor or Bricks, the integration cost of anything else is higher than the licence cost of these. That is a real answer and it is often the right one.

Autonnel

Mine. Apache-2.0, public repository, 11 stars, created 2026-07-09.

Let me put the weaknesses first, because you can check them as easily as I can. It is weeks old. Eleven stars is not a community. There is no track record, no long tail of Stack Overflow answers, and no third party you can hire who already knows it. If “how many other people have hit this bug before me” is high on your list, that list does not currently favour Autonnel.

What it does have: no commercial-use restriction, no agency tier, no licence key, and a repository that resolves. It renders the whole money path (landing page, order form, order bumps, one-click upsells, thank-you page), sends server-side conversion postbacks with the click id carried through checkout, and writes orders back to Shopify, WooCommerce or Picocart. It runs on Node, Docker, or Cloudflare Workers.

curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/autonnel/autonnel/master/docker-compose.yml
docker compose up

That boots without any provider credentials, so you can click through the admin before deciding anything.

The closed baseline: ClickFunnels and systeme.io

Neither is open source and neither pretends to be, which is more than can be said for parts of this category. ClickFunnels runs $97 to $297 a month. systeme.io has a free plan that is genuinely generous.

Pick a hosted platform if nobody on your team wants to touch infrastructure. That is not a consolation prize. A funnel that is live and converting on someone else’s servers beats a self-hosted one that is still half-configured. If reading “Postgres connection string” made you tired, pay them. I mean that.

How to actually choose

If this describes you	Start with
Already on WordPress and WooCommerce	CartFlows, FunnelKit, or WPFunnels
Nobody on the team touches servers	ClickFunnels or systeme.io
Want something small and MIT to read and extend	openfunnels
Freelancer or agency running funnels for clients	Anything OSI-licensed. Check the fair-code carve-out before you commit
On Shopify, tired of paying per order to upsell apps	Autonnel
Want the checkout and attribution path to be code you can read	Autonnel

The part I want you to take away

Not “use Autonnel”. Run the three curl commands at the top of this post against whatever you are about to adopt, including this one. The licence file is the contract; the homepage is a claim.

We keep a licence-by-licence table at /open-source-funnel-builders-compared, re-verified against each project’s own source by a script in our repo, with the date it was last checked printed on the page. If a row goes stale or wrong, it is a bug and I would like to hear about it.

Pricing for the managed version is at /pricing, and the longer, less flattering comparison against ClickFunnels specifically is at /vs/clickfunnels.