Sure. For starters SipHash targets a lower-end spectrum of device (in a way) than Blake2, and is also less flexible. Since SipHash produces a 64 bit digest it i

Sure. For starters SipHash targets a lower-end spectrum of device (in a way) than Blake2, and is also less flexible. Since SipHash produces a 64 bit digest it isn't suitable for many applications in the first place. The two also differ significantly in other cryptographic properties, making Blake2 a more secure and easier (safer) to apply choice. I would tend to say that SipHash is, in a cryptographic context, more an "if you know what you're doing" choice, and not at all a general purpose [cryptographic] hash function.