head to head · open source
Uptime Kuma vs sitespeed.io
Uptime Kuma has 91,498 GitHub stars, 8,431 forks, 805 open issues and last shipped today. sitespeed.io has 5,028 stars, 625 forks, 159 open issues and last shipped 2 days ago. Uptime Kuma leads on adoption by 1,720% (91,498 vs 5,028 stars). Uptime Kuma is written in JavaScript under MIT; sitespeed.io is written in JavaScript under MIT. Uptime Kuma has attracted 9% as many forks as stars, sitespeed.io 12%. 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 | sitespeed.io | |
|---|---|---|
| GitHub stars | ★ 91K | ★ 5.0K |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Written in | JavaScript | JavaScript |
| Last push | 2026-09-18 | 2026-09-16 |
| Forks | ⑂ 8.4K | ⑂ 625 |
| 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 sitespeed.io if
- You want the sitespeed.io feature set and don't need the biggest community
- You prefer the MIT license terms
- Your stack matches JavaScript
- You evaluated both and sitespeed.io 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 sitespeed.io
sitespeed.io is a free, MIT licensed open source web performance tool that drives real browsers to test, monitor, and optimize website speed, and it is aimed at developers, performance engineers, and operations teams that want their own measurement data without signing up for a hosted service.
read the full sitespeed.io 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 sitespeed.io more popular?
Uptime Kuma has 91,498 GitHub stars and sitespeed.io has 5,028. Uptime Kuma has the larger community by that measure.
Are Uptime Kuma and sitespeed.io free?
Both are open source. Uptime Kuma is licensed under MIT and sitespeed.io under MIT. Neither carries a licence fee.
What is the difference between Uptime Kuma and sitespeed.io?
Uptime Kuma is written in JavaScript and sitespeed.io in JavaScript. 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 sitespeed.io?
Choose Uptime Kuma if you want the larger community (91,498 stars) or its MIT licence terms. Choose sitespeed.io if its feature set, stack or MIT licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.