Learn how Cachet and Statusnook 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.
Last 30 days
Last commit
Repository age
Version
Self-hosted
Repository

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

Both Cachet and Statusnook have their unique strengths and serve similar purposes effectively. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Cachet significantly outpaces Statusnook in community adoption with 15,251 stars compared to 985 stars on GitHub. This 15.5x difference suggests Cachet has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, Cachet has 1,631 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
Statusnook is growing faster, adding 10 stars in the last 30 days (+1%) against adding 21 stars for Cachet (+0.1%). Statusnook is the smaller project of the two, so it is closing the gap rather than extending a lead.
Cachet shows more recent development activity with its last commit 22 hours ago, while Statusnook was last updated 2 years ago. This suggests Cachet is being more actively maintained.
Cachet uses PHP, Laravel while Statusnook leverages Bash, Golang.
Cachet has been in development longer, starting 12 years ago, compared to Statusnook which began 2 years ago. This 9.6-year head start suggests Cachet may have more mature features and established processes.
Statusnook is licensed under MIT, while Cachet's license terms are not publicly specified.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Status Pages. However, they also have distinct specializations: Cachet also focuses on Uptime Monitoring.
Both Cachet and Statusnook 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
vs
vs