head to head · open source
Uptime Kuma vs pyroscope
Uptime Kuma has 91,477 GitHub stars, 8,426 forks, 805 open issues and last shipped yesterday. pyroscope has 11,661 stars, 802 forks, 400 open issues and last shipped yesterday. Uptime Kuma leads on adoption by 684% (91,477 vs 11,661 stars). Uptime Kuma is written in JavaScript under MIT; pyroscope is written in Go under AGPL-3.0. Uptime Kuma has attracted 9% as many forks as stars, pyroscope 7%. 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.
← all 8884 open source comparisons
Side by side
| Uptime Kuma | pyroscope | |
|---|---|---|
| GitHub stars | ★ 91K | ★ 12K |
| License | MIT | AGPL-3.0 |
| Written in | JavaScript | Go |
| Last push | 2026-09-17 | 2026-09-17 |
| Forks | ⑂ 8.4K | ⑂ 802 |
| 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 pyroscope if
- You want the pyroscope feature set and don't need the biggest community
- You prefer the AGPL-3.0 license terms
- Your stack matches Go
- You evaluated both and pyroscope 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 pyroscope
Grafana Pyroscope is a continuous profiling platform for developers, SREs, and platform teams who need to find CPU, memory, and I/O bottlenecks in running applications and trace them down to a single line of code.
read the full pyroscope 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 pyroscope more popular?
Uptime Kuma has 91,477 GitHub stars and pyroscope has 11,661. Uptime Kuma has the larger community by that measure.
Are Uptime Kuma and pyroscope free?
Both are open source. Uptime Kuma is licensed under MIT and pyroscope under AGPL-3.0. Neither carries a licence fee.
What is the difference between Uptime Kuma and pyroscope?
Uptime Kuma is written in JavaScript and pyroscope in Go. 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 pyroscope?
Choose Uptime Kuma if you want the larger community (91,477 stars) or its MIT licence terms. Choose pyroscope if its feature set, stack or AGPL-3.0 licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.