What is the main difference between EasyMonitor and Uptime Kuma?

EasyMonitor and Uptime Kuma are both status pages but differ in their approach, features, and target audience. Compare their GitHub stats, technology stack, and community adoption to make the best choice.

Which is better: EasyMonitor or Uptime Kuma?

The choice between EasyMonitor and Uptime Kuma depends on your specific needs, technical requirements, and team preferences. Both are quality open source solutions with active communities.

Can I migrate from EasyMonitor to Uptime Kuma?

Migration between EasyMonitor and Uptime Kuma is possible but requires careful planning. Consider data export/import capabilities, feature parity, and potential workflow changes.

Stellar Hosted – Managed Open Source software hosting in the EU: secure, compliant, fast.

Start using Open Source today

Learn more

EasyMonitor vs Uptime Kuma

Learn how EasyMonitor and Uptime Kuma 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.

EasyMonitor

Deploy your own uptime and performance monitoring with HTTP/ICMP checks, multi-region probes, and custom status pages. MIT licensed, runs on minimal hardware.

Visit EasyMonitor Read more

Stars
39
Forks
3
Last commit
2 months ago
Repository age
9 months
License
MIT
Self-hosted
Yes

Activity score

62/100

View Repository

Uptime Kuma

Monitors websites, APIs, and services with real-time alerts, a status page, and support for dozens of notification channels. Self-hosted and Docker-friendly.

Visit Uptime Kuma Read more

Stars
88,552
Forks
8,049
Last commit
12 hours ago
Repository age
5 years
License
MIT
Self-hosted
Yes

Activity score

99/100

View Repository

Detailed Comparison

Uptime Kuma appears to have several advantages over EasyMonitor, particularly in popularity, activity and maturity. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.

Uptime Kuma wins

Community & Popularity

Uptime Kuma significantly outpaces EasyMonitor in community adoption with 88,552 stars compared to 39 stars on GitHub. This 2270.6x difference suggests Uptime Kuma has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, Uptime Kuma has 8,049 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.

Uptime Kuma wins

Development Activity

Uptime Kuma shows more recent development activity with its last commit 12 hours ago, while EasyMonitor was last updated 2 months ago. This suggests Uptime Kuma is being more actively maintained.

Comparable

Technology Stack

Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, Bash, Golang, PHP. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: EasyMonitor uses CSS, Laravel while Uptime Kuma leverages Typescript, Python, SCSS, Vue, Java, C#.

Uptime Kuma wins

Project Maturity

Uptime Kuma has been in development longer, starting 5 years ago, compared to EasyMonitor which began 9 months ago. This 4.3-year head start suggests Uptime Kuma may have more mature features and established processes.

Comparable

Licensing

Both projects use the MIT license, providing identical terms for usage and distribution.

Comparable

Use Cases & Features

Both tools serve similar use cases in Status Pages, Uptime Monitoring. However, they also have distinct specializations: Uptime Kuma extends into Infrastructure Monitoring.

Comparable