head to head · open source
Uptime Kuma vs picologging
Uptime Kuma has 91,498 GitHub stars, 8,431 forks, 805 open issues and last shipped yesterday. picologging has 780 stars, 29 forks, 52 open issues and last shipped 16 days ago. Uptime Kuma leads on adoption by 11,631% (91,498 vs 780 stars). Uptime Kuma is written in JavaScript under MIT; picologging is written in Python under MIT. Uptime Kuma has attracted 9% as many forks as stars, picologging 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.
← all 13541 open source comparisons
Side by side
| Uptime Kuma | picologging | |
|---|---|---|
| GitHub stars | ★ 91K | ★ 780 |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Written in | JavaScript | Python |
| Last push | 2026-09-18 | 2026-09-03 |
| Forks | ⑂ 8.4K | ⑂ 29 |
| 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
pick picologging if
- You want the picologging feature set and don't need the biggest community
- You prefer the MIT license terms
- Your stack matches Python
- You evaluated both and picologging fits your workflow better
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 picologging
Picologging is a high performance logging library for Python, published by Microsoft under the MIT licence, that works as a drop in replacement for the standard library logging module and is aimed at Python developers who want faster logging without rewriting existing logging code.
read the full picologging overview →
More in Infrastructure & Operations
Related comparisons
More Monitoring & Observability projects
Compare either of these against the rest of the Monitoring & Observability field.
Frequently asked questions
Is Uptime Kuma or picologging more popular?
Uptime Kuma has 91,498 GitHub stars and picologging has 780. Uptime Kuma has the larger community by that measure.
Are Uptime Kuma and picologging free?
Both are open source. Uptime Kuma is licensed under MIT and picologging under MIT. Neither carries a licence fee.
What is the difference between Uptime Kuma and picologging?
Uptime Kuma is written in JavaScript and picologging in Python. 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 picologging?
Choose Uptime Kuma if you want the larger community (91,498 stars) or its MIT licence terms. Choose picologging if its feature set, stack or MIT licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.