Uptime Kuma vs Instatus
Both are alternatives to Atlassian Statuspage. Here's how they stack up — verified facts, no spin.
Also searched as Instatus vs Uptime Kuma — same comparison, one verdict.
Uptime Kuma is open source (MIT) and Instatus is not (Proprietary (hosted service)) — so the real question is whether you want to own the uptime & status monitoring stack or rent it.
Uptime Kuma
TOP PICKThe self-hosted monitor that beat the paid ones on features.
Uptime Kuma is a self-hosted monitoring tool that does, for free and on your own server, most of what the paid services charge monthly for: HTTP, TCP, ping, DNS and keyword checks, 60-second intervals, a genuinely good dashboard, public status pages, and notifications to more than ninety services including Slack, Discord, Telegram, email and webhooks. It runs as one Docker container on hardware you already have. At roughly 89.7k GitHub stars it is one of the most-starred self-hosted projects in existence, and that popularity is deserved rather than fashionable — the free tiers of the commercial services are more limited than this is. MIT licensed, pushed to daily.
Instatus
A fast, cheap status page that does the one job well.
Instatus is a focused competitor to Statuspage: fast pages, unlimited subscribers on paid plans rather than metered ones, custom domains, and a free tier that is genuinely usable. It is proprietary and hosted, and it is here because subscriber-metered pricing is the specific complaint that sends people looking, and Instatus's answer to it is to not meter subscribers. For a team that wants a customer-facing status page and does not want to self-host one, it is usually the cheaper straight swap.
Side by side
10 points of comparison, every one read from a verified field. Green marks the side that wins a row outright. A dash means we do not hold that fact — never that it is zero.
| Uptime Kuma | Instatus | |
|---|---|---|
| Sovereignty ScoreOur transparent 0–100 composite for data ownership and exit cost. | 96 | 44 |
| Open source | Yes | No |
| Self-hostable | Yes | No |
| Local-first data | Yes | No |
| License | MIT | Proprietary (hosted service) |
| Pricing | Free and open source. One Docker container on a server you already run. | Free tier with a usable feature set; paid plans are a flat monthly fee rather than per-subscriber. Checked 2026-08-01. |
| RAM to run it wellThe figure that actually matters, not the vendor's minimum. | 1 GB | — |
| Realistic running costWhat the box costs each month if you run it yourself. | $6/mo — and it should live somewhere other than the infrastructure it monitors | — |
| Setup timeHonest first-install estimate, not the marketing quickstart. | 15 minutes | — |
| Ongoing maintenanceThe part nobody budgets for. | Very low. | — |
Uptime Kuma is Macrostack's recommended Atlassian Statuspage alternative, so it's our pick here.
Weighing both against staying on Atlassian Statuspage? Is Atlassian Statuspage free? What it actually costs →
Uptime Kuma
Strengths
- +60-second checks and unlimited monitors with no plan to upgrade to
- +Public status pages included rather than sold separately
- +Notifications to 90+ services out of the box
- +MIT, one container, and the most-starred tool in the category
Trade-offs
- −It runs on your infrastructure — so it cannot tell you your infrastructure is down
- −Single-node by design; no multi-region checking
- −You own updates, backups and the uptime of the uptime monitor
- −No phone-call escalation or on-call rotation
Instatus
Strengths
- +Does not meter subscribers, which is Statuspage's sharpest cost edge
- +Very fast pages and a clean, modern design
- +Custom domains available on low tiers
- +Straight swap — migration is mostly re-entering components
Trade-offs
- −Proprietary and hosted; no self-host path
- −Smaller company than Atlassian, which matters to some procurement teams
- −Fewer integrations than Statuspage
- −Still a second tool if you already run Uptime Kuma
Which one fits you
The trade-offs above, turned into a decision. Find the line that describes your team.
Choose Uptime Kuma
if you want the source and the option to fork it, and you would rather run it on your own hardware, and your data should stay on machines you control.
Choose Instatus
if does not meter subscribers, which is Statuspage's sharpest cost edge.
Neither, yet
if both carry a real cost you should weigh first — it runs on your infrastructure — so it cannot tell you your infrastructure is down, and proprietary and hosted; no self-host path. If either of those is a dealbreaker for your team, the shortlist is wrong rather than the choice.
What it takes to run these yourself
Real requirements and honest running costs, not the vendor quickstart.
Uptime Kuma vs Instatus — common questions
Is Uptime Kuma a better fit than Instatus for uptime & status monitoring?
It depends on what you are optimising for, and the honest split is this: Uptime Kuma scores 96 to Instatus's 44 on data ownership and exit cost, so it is the safer choice if you care about being able to leave. Instatus earns its place on a different axis — does not meter subscribers, which is Statuspage's sharpest cost edge. Neither is a wrong answer for every team; the table above is the actual comparison.
What happens if we want to switch later?
Uptime Kuma keeps its data local or in open formats, so leaving is an export rather than a negotiation. Instatus keeps your data on its own infrastructure, which is the part to plan for: confirm the export path before you commit, not when you are already trying to leave.
Can I self-host Uptime Kuma?
Uptime Kuma can be self-hosted; Instatus cannot, so it stays on the vendor's infrastructure whatever you do.
Are Uptime Kuma and Instatus both alternatives to Atlassian Statuspage?
Yes — both appear in our Atlassian Statuspage comparison, which is why they are worth putting side by side. People usually arrive here already having decided to move off Atlassian Statuspage and now choosing between the two replacements, which is a narrower and much easier question.
More uptime & status monitoring comparisons
Related alternative guides
Facts verified 2026-08-01. Licenses and pricing change — spotted something out of date? That's a correction we want.