Beszel vs Uptime Kuma
| Tagline | Lightweight server monitoring hub with SSH-based agents and beautiful UI | Fancy self-hosted uptime monitoring with a beautiful dashboard and status pages |
| Category | Monitoring & Status Pages | Monitoring & Status Pages |
| Replaces | UptimeRobot, Pingdom, Datadog | UptimeRobot, Pingdom, Statuspage |
| GitHub stars | 9k | 88k |
| Language | Go | JavaScript |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Self-host difficulty | 1/5 Effortless | 2/5 Easy |
| Deploy options | Docker Docker Compose Manual | Docker Docker Compose Manual |
| Managed hosting | ||
| Last updated | 1 month ago | 5 days ago |
| View repo | View repo |
Where each falls short
The honest trade-offs — what you give up with each, versus the proprietary tools they replace.
Beszel
- No network device or SNMP monitoring
- Alerting options are basic compared to Zabbix or Checkmk
- No long-term data retention tuning or downsampling for historical data
Uptime Kuma
- Single-node by design; no built-in multi-region / global probe network like Pingdom or UptimeRobot Pro
- Status pages are simpler than Statuspage.io (limited custom domains UX, no subscriber-tier management, fewer branding controls)
- No SLA reporting/analytics depth or team RBAC found in commercial offerings
- Scaling to thousands of monitors can strain the single SQLite/MariaDB backend
Bottom line
Choose Beszel if you want the lower-effort setup; choose Uptime Kuma for the larger community and ecosystem. Uptime Kuma has seen more recent development. Open each guide below for deploy steps and the full feature gap.
Uptime Kuma
Fancy self-hosted uptime monitoring with a beautiful dashboard and status pages