OpenStatus vs Uptime Kuma
| Tagline | Open-source uptime monitoring and status page platform with global probes | Fancy self-hosted uptime monitoring with a beautiful dashboard and status pages |
| Category | Monitoring & Status Pages | Monitoring & Status Pages |
| Replaces | Pingdom, UptimeRobot, Statuspage | UptimeRobot, Pingdom, Statuspage |
| GitHub stars | 9.1k | 91k |
| Language | TypeScript | JavaScript |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Self-host difficulty | 4/5 Involved | 2/5 Easy |
| Deploy options | Docker Docker Compose Manual | Docker Docker Compose Manual |
| Managed hosting | ||
| Last updated | yesterday | yesterday |
| View repo | View repo |
Where each falls short
The honest trade-offs — what you give up with each, versus the proprietary tools they replace.
OpenStatus
- Self-hosting is non-trivial: depends on services like Turso/SQLite, Tinybird, and serverless checkers; the OSS path is less documented than the cloud product
- Global multi-region probing is most seamless on their hosted cloud, not self-host
- Younger project; fewer integrations than mature commercial tools
- Some advanced features are gated toward the managed offering
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. Open each guide below for deploy steps and the full feature gap.
OpenStatus
Open-source uptime monitoring and status page platform with global probes
Uptime Kuma
Fancy self-hosted uptime monitoring with a beautiful dashboard and status pages