head to head · open source

Grafana vs AutoKuma

Grafana has 76,791 GitHub stars, 14,749 forks, 3,326 open issues and last shipped yesterday. AutoKuma has 898 stars, 47 forks, 11 open issues and last shipped 3 months ago. Grafana leads on adoption by 8,451% (76,791 vs 898 stars). Grafana is written in TypeScript under AGPL-3.0; AutoKuma is written in Rust under MIT. Grafana has attracted 19% as many forks as stars, AutoKuma 5%. Grafana was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee. The two share 1 topic tag (monitoring), so they are genuine substitutes rather than adjacent tools.

Two open source projects, one decision. Both are free and self-hostable — the differences are community size, license terms, language stack and release pace.

Grafana ★ 77K AutoKuma ★ 898 category Infrastructure & Operations

← all 8884 open source comparisons

Side by side

Grafana AutoKuma
GitHub stars ★ 77K ★ 898
License AGPL-3.0 MIT
Written in TypeScript Rust
Last push 2026-09-17 2026-06-18
Forks ⑂ 15K ⑂ 47
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick Grafana if

  • You weight community size — 77K stars and counting
  • You want the AGPL-3.0 license terms
  • Your stack matches TypeScript
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full Grafana profile →

pick AutoKuma if

  • You want the AutoKuma feature set and don't need the biggest community
  • You prefer the MIT license terms
  • Your stack matches Rust
  • You evaluated both and AutoKuma fits your workflow better

full AutoKuma profile →

About Grafana

Grafana is an open source observability platform for visualizing metrics, logs, and traces across diverse data sources. It runs in the infrastructure and operations ecosystem, designed for teams needing unified visibility into system behavior without vendor lock in. Built with TypeScript and Go, it provides a composable architecture that integrates with existing toolchains.

read the full Grafana overview →

About AutoKuma

AutoKuma is an MIT licensed Rust utility that creates Uptime Kuma monitors automatically from Docker container labels, .json / .toml files, or Kubernetes custom resources, made for self hosters and operators who run Uptime Kuma next to containerized services and do not want to add monitors one by one in the web UI.

read the full AutoKuma overview →

More in Infrastructure & Operations

Immich ★ 114K Uptime Kuma ★ 91K worldmonitor ★ 87K mall ★ 85K NetData ★ 81K Elasticsearch ★ 78K

Related comparisons

uptime-kuma vs grafana worldmonitor vs grafana netdata vs grafana uptime-kuma vs worldmonitor uptime-kuma vs netdata worldmonitor vs netdata uptime-kuma vs huginn worldmonitor vs huginn immich vs paperless-ngx immich vs ceph immich vs filestash immich vs garage immich vs storj immich vs alarik immich vs spinifex paperless-ngx vs ceph mall vs prometheus mall vs nocodb mall vs etcd mall vs dbeaver mall vs orm prometheus vs nocodb mall vs milvus mall vs tidb

More Monitoring & Observability projects

Compare either of these against the rest of the Monitoring & Observability field.

Grafana vs Uptime Kuma Grafana vs worldmonitor Grafana vs NetData Grafana vs huginn Grafana vs Sentry Grafana vs SigNoz Grafana vs Grafana Loki Grafana vs beszel Grafana vs cilium Grafana vs Apache SkyWalking Grafana vs jaeger Grafana vs Vector

Frequently asked questions

Is Grafana or AutoKuma more popular?

Grafana has 76,791 GitHub stars and AutoKuma has 898. Grafana has the larger community by that measure.

Are Grafana and AutoKuma free?

Both are open source. Grafana is licensed under AGPL-3.0 and AutoKuma under MIT. Neither carries a licence fee.

What is the difference between Grafana and AutoKuma?

Grafana is written in TypeScript and AutoKuma in Rust. The practical differences are community size, licence terms, language stack and release cadence — all compared in the table above.

Which should I choose, Grafana or AutoKuma?

Choose Grafana if you want the larger community (76,791 stars) or its AGPL-3.0 licence terms. Choose AutoKuma if its feature set, stack or MIT licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.