Learn how HyperDX and Maple differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these performance monitoring (apm) tools is best for you.
Last 30 days
Last commit
Repository age
Version
License
Self-hosted
Repository

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

HyperDX appears to have several advantages over Maple, particularly in popularity, maturity and licensing. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
HyperDX significantly outpaces Maple in community adoption with 9,840 stars compared to 1,692 stars on GitHub. This 5.8x difference suggests HyperDX has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, HyperDX has 453 forks, indicating moderate developer engagement.
Maple is growing faster, adding 32 stars in the last 30 days (+1.9%) against adding 156 stars for HyperDX (+1.6%). Maple is the smaller project of the two, so it is closing the gap rather than extending a lead.
Both projects show recent activity, with HyperDX last updated 1 day ago and Maple 1 day ago.
HyperDX has been in development longer, starting 3 years ago, compared to Maple which began 6 months ago. This 2.5-year head start suggests HyperDX may have more mature features and established processes.
HyperDX is licensed under MIT, while Maple's license terms are not publicly specified.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Performance Monitoring (APM), Log Management. However, they also have distinct specializations: HyperDX also focuses on Error Tracking.
Both HyperDX and Maple offer self-hosting capabilities, giving you full control over your data and infrastructure.