Grafana Loki vs Uptime Kuma
| Tagline | Horizontally scalable log aggregation system designed to work with Grafana | Fancy self-hosted uptime monitoring with a beautiful dashboard and status pages |
| Category | Monitoring & Status Pages | Monitoring & Status Pages |
| Replaces | Datadog, Statuspage | UptimeRobot, Pingdom, Statuspage |
| GitHub stars | 24k | 88k |
| Language | Go | JavaScript |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Self-host difficulty | 3/5 Moderate | 2/5 Easy |
| Deploy options | Docker Docker Compose Kubernetes | 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.
Grafana Loki
- Full-text search is not supported; only label-based log filtering
- Requires Grafana for a usable query UI (no standalone dashboard)
- Scalable distributed mode requires object storage (S3/GCS) and careful tuning
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 Uptime Kuma 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.
Grafana Loki
Horizontally scalable log aggregation system designed to work with Grafana
Uptime Kuma
Fancy self-hosted uptime monitoring with a beautiful dashboard and status pages