Uptime Kuma significantly outpaces Statusnook in community adoption with 89,634 stars compared to 976 stars on GitHub. This 91.8x difference suggests Uptime Kuma has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, Uptime Kuma has 8,185 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.

Uptime Kuma shows more recent development activity with its last commit 23 hours ago, while Statusnook was last updated 2 years ago. This suggests Uptime Kuma is being more actively maintained.

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

Uptime Kuma has been in development longer, starting 5 years ago, compared to Statusnook which began 2 years ago. This 2.9-year head start suggests Uptime Kuma may have more mature features and established processes.

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

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

Both Statusnook and Uptime Kuma offer self-hosting capabilities, giving you full control over your data and infrastructure.