Uptime Kuma vs OpenStatus: Self-Hosted Uptime Monitoring
Uptime Kuma vs OpenStatus: Self-Hosted Uptime Monitoring
Two open source approaches to uptime monitoring. Uptime Kuma is the beloved self-hosted monitor with 62K+ GitHub stars and a clean UI. OpenStatus is the modern alternative with edge monitoring, beautiful status pages, and an API-first design.
Quick Verdict
Choose Uptime Kuma for the most feature-rich self-hosted monitor — 20+ monitor types, 90+ notification channels, and the largest community. Choose OpenStatus for modern edge monitoring, beautiful public status pages, and a cloud-native architecture.
The Comparison
| Feature | Uptime Kuma | OpenStatus |
|---|---|---|
| Monitor types | 20+ (HTTP, TCP, DNS, Docker, etc.) | HTTP, TCP |
| Notification channels | 90+ | Slack, Discord, email, webhooks |
| Status pages | ✅ (basic) | ✅ (beautiful, customizable) |
| Edge monitoring | ❌ (single location) | ✅ (multiple regions) |
| Incident management | ✅ (manual) | ✅ (manual + automated) |
| Response time charts | ✅ | ✅ |
| SSL certificate monitoring | ✅ | ✅ |
| Keyword monitoring | ✅ | ❌ |
| Docker monitoring | ✅ | ❌ |
| DNS monitoring | ✅ | ❌ |
| Game server monitoring | ✅ | ❌ |
| Ping/ICMP | ✅ | ❌ |
| API | ✅ (basic) | ✅ (comprehensive REST) |
| Custom domains | Status page | Status page |
| Maintenance windows | ✅ | ✅ |
| 2FA | ✅ | ✅ |
| Multi-user | Limited | ✅ |
| Stack | Node.js, SQLite | Next.js, Turso |
| Self-hosted | ✅ | ✅ |
| Cloud option | ❌ | OpenStatus Cloud |
| Stars | 62K+ | 6K+ |
| License | MIT | AGPL-3.0 |
When to Choose Uptime Kuma
- You want the most monitor types (HTTP, TCP, DNS, Docker, game servers, MQTT, etc.)
- 90+ notification channels are needed (Telegram, PagerDuty, Gotify, Matrix, etc.)
- Docker container monitoring is important
- Single-server deployment with SQLite (simplest possible setup)
- The largest community and most mature project
- Keyword and content monitoring
- You don't need multi-region checks
When to Choose OpenStatus
- Beautiful public status pages are a priority
- Edge monitoring from multiple geographic regions
- API-first design for programmatic management
- Cloud-native architecture (serverless-friendly)
- Built-in incident management workflow
- Modern tech stack (Next.js, edge functions)
- Managed cloud option available
Setup Comparison
Uptime Kuma — one command:
docker run -d --restart=always \
-p 3001:3001 \
-v uptime-kuma:/app/data \
--name uptime-kuma \
louislam/uptime-kuma:1
OpenStatus — requires more setup:
git clone https://github.com/openstatusHQ/openstatus.git
cd openstatus
pnpm install
cp .env.example .env
# Configure Turso database, API keys
pnpm dev
Uptime Kuma wins on simplicity — single Docker container, SQLite database, no external dependencies. OpenStatus requires a database and more configuration but offers a more modern architecture.
The Status Page Difference
Both offer public status pages, but they're different:
Uptime Kuma — functional status pages with uptime percentages, response time charts, and incident history. Gets the job done. Customization is limited.
OpenStatus — designed for beautiful status pages. Custom branding, custom domains, subscriber notifications, and a modern design that looks professional. If your status page is customer-facing, OpenStatus delivers a more polished experience.
The Bottom Line
Uptime Kuma is the Swiss Army knife of self-hosted monitoring — 20+ monitor types, 90+ notification channels, and the simplest possible deployment. It's the default recommendation for anyone wanting self-hosted uptime monitoring.
OpenStatus is the modern alternative — fewer monitor types, but edge monitoring from multiple regions, beautiful status pages, and an API-first architecture. Choose it when status page quality and multi-region monitoring matter more than monitor type diversity.
For most self-hosters, Uptime Kuma is the right choice. For teams needing customer-facing status pages, OpenStatus is worth the extra setup.
Compare monitoring tools on OSSAlt — features, notification channels, and community health side by side.