Statuspage vs Uptime Kuma
A side-by-side look at Statuspage (the paid SaaS) and Uptime Kuma (the open source alternative). Use this page to decide if the switch fits your team and workflow.
| Statuspage | Uptime Kuma | |
|---|---|---|
| Tagline | Atlassian's hosted public status pages. | Self-hosted uptime monitor — Pingdom alternative. |
| License | Proprietary SaaS | MIT |
| Pricing | Free up to 100 subscribers; paid from $29/month; Enterprise far higher. | Free to self-host |
| Self-host option | No | Yes — difficulty 1/5 |
| Hosted cloud available | Yes (only option) | No |
| Desktop apps | Varies by product | Web only |
| Mobile apps | Official apps typically available | None official |
Best for
Good-looking uptime monitoring with status page built in, deployed in one command.
Uptime Kuma strengths
- Single container, minimal resources.
- Clean UI with status pages.
- Many notification integrations.
Uptime Kuma weaknesses
- Not a full APM — simple uptime checks.
- Multi-node setup is harder.
- Data resides where you host it (single point).
What's the catch with Statuspage?
- Subscriber pricing doesn't scale well for consumer apps.
- Branded/white-label features locked behind Business+.
- Feels neglected compared to other Atlassian products.
Still unsure?
Check the full list of alternatives to Statuspage: see Statuspage alternatives, or learn more about Uptime Kuma on its project page.
Recommended reading
When self-hosting goes wrong: seven failure modes and how to avoid them
An honest retrospective on the ways self-hosted setups break — not in theory, but in practice — and the small habits that prevent most of them.
Will the open source project you depend on still exist in three years?
Bus factor, maintainer burnout, funding models, and the signals that separate OSS projects that survive from those that quietly decay.
From SaaS to self-hosted: a 30-day migration playbook
A week-by-week plan to move one service off SaaS and onto your own server without breaking your team's workflow.