head to head · open source

Uptime Kuma vs psutil

Uptime Kuma has 91,477 GitHub stars, 8,426 forks, 805 open issues and last shipped yesterday. psutil has 11,276 stars, 1,514 forks, 258 open issues and last shipped 4 days ago. Uptime Kuma leads on adoption by 711% (91,477 vs 11,276 stars). Uptime Kuma is written in JavaScript under MIT; psutil is written in Python under BSD-3-Clause. Uptime Kuma has attracted 9% as many forks as stars, psutil 13%. Uptime Kuma 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.

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

← all 8884 open source comparisons

Side by side

Uptime Kuma psutil
GitHub stars ★ 91K ★ 11K
License MIT BSD-3-Clause
Written in JavaScript Python
Last push 2026-09-17 2026-09-14
Forks ⑂ 8.4K ⑂ 1.5K
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 psutil if

  • You want the psutil feature set and don't need the biggest community
  • You prefer the BSD-3-Clause license terms
  • Your stack matches Python
  • You evaluated both and psutil fits your workflow better

full psutil 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 psutil

psutil is a cross platform Python library for retrieving information about running processes and system utilization — CPU, memory, disks, network and sensors — for developers and operators who need that data programmatically from inside Python code rather than from shell output.

read the full psutil 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 psutil more popular?

Uptime Kuma has 91,477 GitHub stars and psutil has 11,276. Uptime Kuma has the larger community by that measure.

Are Uptime Kuma and psutil free?

Both are open source. Uptime Kuma is licensed under MIT and psutil under BSD-3-Clause. Neither carries a licence fee.

What is the difference between Uptime Kuma and psutil?

Uptime Kuma is written in JavaScript and psutil 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 psutil?

Choose Uptime Kuma if you want the larger community (91,477 stars) or its MIT licence terms. Choose psutil if its feature set, stack or BSD-3-Clause licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.