Uptime Kuma vs UptimeRobot
Both are alternatives to Pingdom. Here's how they stack up — verified facts, no spin.
Also searched as UptimeRobot vs Uptime Kuma — same comparison, one verdict.
Uptime Kuma is open source (MIT) and UptimeRobot 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.
UptimeRobot
Hosted checks from outside your network, with a free tier that is actually usable.
UptimeRobot is the hosted answer, and it solves the one problem no self-hosted monitor can: it watches your site from outside your own infrastructure, so when your server, your network or your data centre goes down, the thing telling you about it is not also down. The free tier is unusually generous — 50 monitors at 5-minute intervals, email alerts and a public status page — which is more than enough for most personal sites and small businesses. Paid plans add 30-second checks, SMS and voice alerts, and multi-location verification to cut false alarms. It is proprietary and hosted, which is why it scores where it does; it is on this page because external monitoring is a real requirement and pretending otherwise would not serve the reader.
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 | UptimeRobot | |
|---|---|---|
| Sovereignty ScoreOur transparent 0–100 composite for data ownership and exit cost. | 96 | 48 |
| 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: 50 monitors at 5-minute checks, with a public status page. Paid plans add 30-second intervals, SMS/voice alerts and multi-location checks. 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 Pingdom alternative, so it's our pick here.
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
UptimeRobot
Strengths
- +Checks from outside your network — the one thing self-hosting cannot do
- +Free tier covers 50 monitors, which is genuinely enough for most people
- +Nothing to install, patch or keep running
- +Multi-location verification cuts false alarms from transient network blips
Trade-offs
- −Proprietary and hosted — you do not own the monitoring or its history
- −Free tier is capped at 5-minute checks, so a short outage can be missed
- −SMS and voice alerts are paid add-ons
- −Your uptime data lives in a third party's system
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 UptimeRobot
if checks from outside your network — the one thing self-hosting cannot do.
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 — you do not own the monitoring or its history. 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 UptimeRobot — common questions
Is Uptime Kuma a better fit than UptimeRobot for uptime & status monitoring?
It depends on what you are optimising for, and the honest split is this: Uptime Kuma scores 96 to UptimeRobot's 48 on data ownership and exit cost, so it is the safer choice if you care about being able to leave. UptimeRobot earns its place on a different axis — checks from outside your network — the one thing self-hosting cannot do. 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. UptimeRobot 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; UptimeRobot cannot, so it stays on the vendor's infrastructure whatever you do.
Are Uptime Kuma and UptimeRobot both alternatives to Pingdom?
Yes — both appear in our Pingdom comparison, which is why they are worth putting side by side. People usually arrive here already having decided to move off Pingdom 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.