Cachet vs SigNoz
| Tagline | Open-source, self-hosted status page system for communicating incidents | Open-source APM and observability for metrics, traces, and logs in one app |
| Category | Monitoring & Status Pages | Monitoring & Status Pages |
| Replaces | Statuspage | Datadog |
| GitHub stars | 15k | 32k |
| Language | PHP | TypeScript |
| License | BSD-3-Clause | MIT |
| Self-host difficulty | 3/5 Moderate | 3/5 Moderate |
| Deploy options | Docker Docker Compose Manual | Docker Docker Compose Kubernetes Manual |
| Managed hosting | ||
| Last updated | 8 days ago | 4 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.
Cachet
- Status page only; it does NOT actively monitor your services (you must push incidents via API or integrate a monitor)
- No built-in synthetic checks like Pingdom/UptimeRobot
- The v3 rewrite went through long periods of slow development and reorganization
- Fewer polished integrations and subscriber-tier features than Atlassian Statuspage
SigNoz
- Runs a heavier stack (ClickHouse + OTel collector + multiple services), needing more resources than lightweight monitors
- Some advanced features and SSO are reserved for the cloud/enterprise tier
- No public status page or simple uptime checks like UptimeRobot
- Younger ecosystem than Datadog; fewer turnkey integrations
Bottom line
Both are a similar lift to self-host; choose SigNoz for the larger community and ecosystem. SigNoz has seen more recent development. Open each guide below for deploy steps and the full feature gap.