head to head · open source

Uptime Kuma vs zipkin

Uptime Kuma has 91,477 GitHub stars, 8,426 forks, 805 open issues and last shipped yesterday. zipkin has 17,461 stars, 3,098 forks, 175 open issues and last shipped 1 months ago. Uptime Kuma leads on adoption by 424% (91,477 vs 17,461 stars). Uptime Kuma is written in JavaScript under MIT; zipkin is written in Java under Apache-2.0. Uptime Kuma has attracted 9% as many forks as stars, zipkin 18%. 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 zipkin ★ 17K category Infrastructure & Operations

← all 8884 open source comparisons

Side by side

Uptime Kuma zipkin
GitHub stars ★ 91K ★ 17K
License MIT Apache-2.0
Written in JavaScript Java
Last push 2026-09-17 2026-08-06
Forks ⑂ 8.4K ⑂ 3.1K
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 zipkin if

  • You want the zipkin feature set and don't need the biggest community
  • You prefer the Apache-2.0 license terms
  • Your stack matches Java
  • You evaluated both and zipkin fits your workflow better

full zipkin 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 zipkin

Zipkin is a distributed tracing system maintained under the OpenZipkin organization and written in Java, released under the Apache 2.0 license. It lives in the Java and JVM ecosystem as a standalone server, while its instrumentation libraries span many languages. The project gathers the timing data needed to troubleshoot latency problems in service architectures, and it covers both the collection and the lookup of that data.

read the full zipkin 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 zipkin more popular?

Uptime Kuma has 91,477 GitHub stars and zipkin has 17,461. Uptime Kuma has the larger community by that measure.

Are Uptime Kuma and zipkin free?

Both are open source. Uptime Kuma is licensed under MIT and zipkin under Apache-2.0. Neither carries a licence fee.

What is the difference between Uptime Kuma and zipkin?

Uptime Kuma is written in JavaScript and zipkin in Java. 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 zipkin?

Choose Uptime Kuma if you want the larger community (91,477 stars) or its MIT licence terms. Choose zipkin if its feature set, stack or Apache-2.0 licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.