Learn how HyperDX and SigNoz 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.
Auto-fetched .

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

Both HyperDX and SigNoz 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.
SigNoz leads in popularity with 26,671 stars vs 9,455 stars for HyperDX. The 182% higher star count indicates stronger community adoption. In terms of developer contributions, SigNoz has 2,122 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
Both projects show recent activity, with HyperDX last updated 7 hours ago and SigNoz 5 hours ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, Bash, Typescript, JSX, SCSS, Golang. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: HyperDX uses CSS, Next.js while SigNoz leverages Python.
SigNoz has been in development longer, starting 5 years ago, compared to HyperDX which began 3 years ago. This 2.7-year head start suggests SigNoz may have more mature features and established processes.
HyperDX is licensed under MIT, while SigNoz's license terms are not publicly specified.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Performance Monitoring (APM), Log Management, Monitoring & Observability. However, they also have distinct specializations: HyperDX also focuses on Error Tracking while SigNoz extends into Infrastructure Monitoring.
Both HyperDX and SigNoz offer self-hosting capabilities, giving you full control over your data and infrastructure.