tidyr
tidyr replaced separate() with a family that says what it does.
A side-by-side editorial comparison of dowhy and modeltime — release velocity, themes, recent moves, and the top alternatives to consider.
DoWhy adds one estimation method a year and keeps its identification edge.
DoWhy is at v0.14, which added a doubly robust estimator and Python 3.13 support. The releases before it followed the same shape: v0.13 brought the Generalized Adjustment Criterion for identification, v0.12 added time-series effect estimation and a rank-based anomaly scorer. Between the feature releases sit patch versions handling pandas and CUDA breakage.
modeltime built conformal intervals in, then went quiet on features.
modeltime is at 1.3.3, a single change making the package robust to xgboost version shifts. The feature weight sits in 1.3.2, which added a future-based parallel backend, the maape() accuracy metric and dials helpers for ADAM engine tuning, and further back in the 1.2.8 and 1.3.0 pair that introduced conformal prediction intervals and then carried them through the nested forecasting workflow.
DoWhy is at v0.14, which added a doubly robust estimator and Python 3.13 support. The releases before it followed the same shape: v0.13 brought the Generalized Adjustment Criterion for identification, v0.12 added time-series effect estimation and a rank-based anomaly scorer. Between the feature releases sit patch versions handling pandas and CUDA breakage.
Two threads run through the window. The identification side — DoWhy's differentiator against libraries that only estimate — keeps gaining criteria, from frontdoor with multiple variables through the Generalized Adjustment Criterion. The GCM side grows separately with missing-data handling, classifier selection logic and calibration work. The two halves are converging on a single API rather than staying separate entry points.
Given the pace of one estimator or criterion per release and the experimental flags still on missing-data support in GCM, the next release most likely promotes existing experimental features rather than opening a new estimation family.
modeltime is at 1.3.3, a single change making the package robust to xgboost version shifts. The feature weight sits in 1.3.2, which added a future-based parallel backend, the maape() accuracy metric and dials helpers for ADAM engine tuning, and further back in the 1.2.8 and 1.3.0 pair that introduced conformal prediction intervals and then carried them through the nested forecasting workflow.
The arc runs from uncertainty quantification to execution. Conformal intervals arrived first and were then threaded through nested fitting, refitting and the printed forecast tables so users can see which confidence method produced an interval. The later work moves down a layer to how forecasts are computed — a portable future backend replacing foreach tuning — rather than what they express.
With only an xgboost compatibility fix since the 1.3.2 feature release, the entries do not support a confident prediction about what comes next beyond continued dependency maintenance.
Other Analytics products tracked by Sparkpulse, ranked by recent ship velocity. Each card links to a full editorial trajectory and lets you pivot into a head-to-head comparison with either dowhy or modeltime.
tidyr replaced separate() with a family that says what it does.
performance keeps adding ways to check a model you have already fitted.
CmdStanPy is clearing deprecations ahead of a 2.0 it keeps announcing.
OpenHouse is hardening the seams where table policies and jobs quietly fail.
silx 3.0 moved its default Qt binding to PySide6 — a migration for everyone embedding it.
statsmodels ships only what the ecosystem breaks — six releases, no new statistics.
See all dowhy alternatives → · See all modeltime alternatives →
Latest ship moves from both products, interleaved chronologically. ⚡ = editorial spark.
They serve adjacent needs but don't currently overlap on shipped themes. dowhy and modeltime are shipping at a similar cadence (velocity 0.0 vs 0.0, both within Sparkpulse's "active" band). See the at-a-glance table above for a side-by-side breakdown of velocity, recent sparks, and editorial themes.
Sparkpulse doesn't pick a winner — we score release velocity, not feature parity. dowhy and modeltime are shipping at a similar cadence (velocity 0.0 vs 0.0, both within Sparkpulse's "active" band). For your specific use case, the alternatives sections above list other Analytics products to evaluate alongside.
Top dowhy alternatives in Analytics are ranked by recent ship velocity. Browse the "dowhy alternatives" section above for the current picks, or visit /alternatives/dowhy for the full list with editorial commentary on each.
Top modeltime alternatives in Analytics are ranked by recent ship velocity. Browse the "modeltime alternatives" section above for the current picks, or visit /alternatives/modeltime for the full list with editorial commentary on each.