Learn how Cachet and OneUptime differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these status pages is best for you.
Stars
Forks
Last commit
Repository age
Self-hosted
Auto-fetched .

Stars
Forks
Last commit
Repository age
License
Self-hosted
Auto-fetched .

Both Cachet and OneUptime have their unique strengths and serve similar purposes effectively. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Cachet leads in popularity with 15,023 stars vs 6,914 stars for OneUptime. The 117% higher star count indicates stronger community adoption. In terms of developer contributions, Cachet has 1,613 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
Both projects show recent activity, with Cachet last updated 2 days ago and OneUptime 10 hours ago.
Cachet uses PHP, Laravel while OneUptime leverages JavaScript, CSS, Bash, Typescript, JSX, Python, Golang, C#.
Cachet has been in development longer, starting 11 years ago, compared to OneUptime which began 5 years ago. This 6.7-year head start suggests Cachet may have more mature features and established processes.
OneUptime is licensed under Apache-2.0, while Cachet's license terms are not publicly specified.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Status Pages, Uptime Monitoring. However, they also have distinct specializations: OneUptime extends into Performance Monitoring (APM).
Both Cachet and OneUptime offer self-hosting capabilities, giving you full control over your data and infrastructure.