How We Compare
Given the popularity of the Media Mix Modelling (MMM) approach, numerous packages are available. Below is a concise comparison:
| Feature | PyMC-Marketing | Robyn | Orbit KTR | Meridian* | AMMM |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Language | Python | R | Python | Python | Python |
| Approach | Bayesian | Traditional ML | Bayesian | Bayesian | Bayesian |
| Foundation | PyMC | - | STAN/Pyro | TensorFlow Probability | PyMC + JAX |
| Company | PyMC Labs | Meta | Uber | Independent | |
| Open source | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Model Building | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Out-of-Sample Forecasting | Yes | No | Yes | No | No |
| Budget Optimiser | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes |
| Time-Varying Intercept | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Time-Varying Coefficients | Yes | No | Yes | No | No |
| Custom Priors | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes |
| Custom Model Terms | Yes | No | No | No | No |
| Lift-Test Calibration | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes |
| Geographic Modelling | Yes | No | No | Yes | No |
| Unit-Tested | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| MLflow Integration | Yes | No | No | Yes | No |
| GPU Sampling Acceleration | Yes | N/A | No | Yes | Yes |
| Prophet Integration | No | No | No | No | Yes |
| Automated Outlier Handling | No | No | No | No | Yes |
| Model Selection (ELPD) | No | No | No | No | Yes |
| Transfer Entropy Analysis | No | No | No | No | Yes |
| Stationarity Testing | No | No | No | No | Yes |
| Consulting Support | Provided by Authors | Third-party agency | Third-party agency | Third-party agency | Provided by Author |
*Meridian has been released as successor of Lightweight-MMM, which has been deprecated by Google
Last updated: 2025-08-07
Last reviewed: 2025-10-06
Key Takeaway
Section titled “Key Takeaway”These libraries for MMM models implement different flavours of Bayesian models. While they share a broadly similar statistical foundation, they differ in API flexibility, underlying technology stack, and implementation approach.
PyMC-Marketing is a widely used open-source library with an extensive feature set and strong community support. Its flexibility makes it suitable for teams with complex requirements, though this breadth comes with a significant learning curve. While AMMM is built using PyMC (the underlying probabilistic programming framework), it is not a fork of PyMC-Marketing. AMMM represents a distinct implementation philosophy focused on statistical rigour, model stability, and practical usability for typical MMM use cases.
Other libraries have their own strengths. For example, Google Meridian features a more opinionated API and integration with the Google ecosystem, which can be advantageous for organisations already embedded in Google’s stack.
Your optimal choice should depend primarily on:
- Your team’s technical expertise
- Complexity of your data and client use cases
- Preference for an independent open-source solution vs. one that is closed source
Our Recommendation
Section titled “Our Recommendation”Choose Meta Robyn if:
Section titled “Choose Meta Robyn if:”- Your team primarily uses R instead of Python
- You prefer a “simpler” but less rigourous approach than Bayesian Models (Ridge regression)
- Your MMM data tends to be relatively simple and number of channels small
Choose Google Meridian if:
Section titled “Choose Google Meridian if:”- You want a simplified (albeit less flexible) API to build models across geographies
- You want strong integration with other Google products such as Collab
- You have the expertise to work with and debug TFP (which can be non-trivial)
Choose PyMC-Marketing if:
Section titled “Choose PyMC-Marketing if:”- You want its advanced statistical modelling capabilities (e.g., Gaussian Processes) and understand the complexity–interpretability–stability trade-offs
- Integration into broader data science workflows is important (MLflow)
- You prefer independence from major ad publishers and networks
- Professional consulting support is available (but costly)
Choose AMMM if:
Section titled “Choose AMMM if:”- Statistical rigour and model stability are your top priorities
- You want efficient use of degrees of freedom (Prophet integration for holidays vs individual dummy variables)
- Automated seasonality detection is preferred over manual specification (Prophet vs knots/splines)
- You need rigourous model diagnostics and selection criteria (ELPD, transfer entropy, stationarity tests)
- Your dataset has outliers that need robust handling (quasi-winsorisation)
- You prefer 100% in-sample inference for typical MMM sample sizes (52-104 weeks)
- You value a statistically sound, battle-tested approach over extensive customisation options
- Consulting support from the package author is available
Glossary
- Out-of-Sample Forecasting: Producing predictions for future time periods beyond the observed time horizon. This is distinct from evaluating a model on a held-out test split within the observed data.