Learn how Uptime Kuma and Uptimepage differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these uptime monitoring tools is best for you.
Last 30 days
Last commit
Repository age
Version
License
Self-hosted
Repository

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

Uptime Kuma appears to have several advantages over Uptimepage, particularly in popularity, maturity and licensing. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, activity, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Uptime Kuma significantly outpaces Uptimepage in community adoption with 90,642 stars compared to 17 stars on GitHub. This 5331.9x difference suggests Uptime Kuma has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, Uptime Kuma has 8,297 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
Both projects show recent activity, with Uptime Kuma last updated 15 hours ago and Uptimepage 3 days ago.
Uptime Kuma has been in development longer, starting 5 years ago, compared to Uptimepage which began 4 months ago. This 4.9-year head start suggests Uptime Kuma may have more mature features and established processes.
Uptime Kuma uses the MIT license, which is more permissive than Uptimepage's AGPL-3.0 license, potentially offering greater flexibility for commercial use and integration.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Uptime Monitoring, Status Pages. However, they also have distinct specializations: Uptime Kuma also focuses on Infrastructure Monitoring.
Both Uptime Kuma and Uptimepage 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
vs