head to head · open source

Uptime Kuma vs lnav

Uptime Kuma has 91,477 GitHub stars, 8,426 forks, 805 open issues and last shipped yesterday. lnav has 10,675 stars, 403 forks, 295 open issues and last shipped 4 days ago. Uptime Kuma leads on adoption by 757% (91,477 vs 10,675 stars). Uptime Kuma is written in JavaScript under MIT; lnav is written in C++ under BSD-2-Clause. Uptime Kuma has attracted 9% as many forks as stars, lnav 4%. Uptime Kuma was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee.

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

Uptime Kuma ★ 91K lnav ★ 11K category Infrastructure & Operations

← all 8884 open source comparisons

Side by side

Uptime Kuma lnav
GitHub stars ★ 91K ★ 11K
License MIT BSD-2-Clause
Written in JavaScript C++
Last push 2026-09-17 2026-09-14
Forks ⑂ 8.4K ⑂ 403
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick Uptime Kuma if

  • You weight community size — 91K stars and counting
  • You want the MIT license terms
  • Your stack matches JavaScript
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full Uptime Kuma profile →

pick lnav if

  • You want the lnav feature set and don't need the biggest community
  • You prefer the BSD-2-Clause license terms
  • Your stack matches C++
  • You evaluated both and lnav fits your workflow better

full lnav profile →

About Uptime Kuma

Uptime Kuma is a free, MIT licensed, self hosted monitoring tool with a reactive web dashboard, built for operators and teams that want to watch their own HTTP, TCP, and DNS endpoints and keep the resulting data on their own infrastructure.

read the full Uptime Kuma overview →

About lnav

lnav is a log file viewer for the terminal that decompresses, detects the format of, merges, indexes and queries log files in one interactive text interface, built for developers, system administrators and support engineers who diagnose systems from the command line.

read the full lnav overview →

More in Infrastructure & Operations

Immich ★ 114K worldmonitor ★ 87K mall ★ 85K NetData ★ 81K Elasticsearch ★ 78K Grafana ★ 77K

Related comparisons

uptime-kuma vs worldmonitor uptime-kuma vs netdata uptime-kuma vs grafana uptime-kuma vs huginn uptime-kuma vs openvpn uptime-kuma vs wr-do uptime-kuma vs plakar uptime-kuma vs pluton worldmonitor vs netdata worldmonitor vs grafana netdata vs grafana 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

More Monitoring & Observability projects

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

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

Frequently asked questions

Is Uptime Kuma or lnav more popular?

Uptime Kuma has 91,477 GitHub stars and lnav has 10,675. Uptime Kuma has the larger community by that measure.

Are Uptime Kuma and lnav free?

Both are open source. Uptime Kuma is licensed under MIT and lnav under BSD-2-Clause. Neither carries a licence fee.

What is the difference between Uptime Kuma and lnav?

Uptime Kuma is written in JavaScript and lnav in C++. The practical differences are community size, licence terms, language stack and release cadence — all compared in the table above.

Which should I choose, Uptime Kuma or lnav?

Choose Uptime Kuma if you want the larger community (91,477 stars) or its MIT licence terms. Choose lnav if its feature set, stack or BSD-2-Clause licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.