Learn how Cachet and Healthchecks differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these uptime monitoring tools is best for you.
Last 30 days
Last commit
Repository age
Version
Self-hosted
Repository

Last 30 days
Last commit
Repository age
Version
License
Self-hosted
Repository

Healthchecks appears to have several advantages over Cachet, particularly in growth and licensing. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Both tools have similar popularity levels, with Cachet having 15,238 stars and Healthchecks having 10,312 stars on GitHub. In terms of developer contributions, Cachet has 1,629 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
Healthchecks is growing faster, adding 76 stars in the last 30 days (+0.7%) against adding 37 stars for Cachet (+0.2%). Healthchecks is the smaller project of the two, so it is closing the gap rather than extending a lead.
Both projects show recent activity, with Cachet last updated 2 days ago and Healthchecks 19 hours ago.
Cachet uses PHP, Laravel while Healthchecks leverages Bash, Python.
Both projects started around the same time, with Cachet beginning 12 years ago and Healthchecks 11 years ago.
Healthchecks is licensed under BSD-3-Clause, while Cachet's license terms are not publicly specified.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Uptime Monitoring. However, they also have distinct specializations: Cachet also focuses on Status Pages while Healthchecks extends into Job Scheduling.
Both Cachet and Healthchecks offer self-hosting capabilities, giving you full control over your data and infrastructure.
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs