Healthchecks vs Statping-ng
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted monitoring & status options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Healthchecks
Cron job and scheduled task monitoring
VS
Statping-ng
Status page and monitoring server
| Feature | Healthchecks | Statping-ng |
|---|---|---|
| Deploy effort | Under-an-hour setup | Under-an-hour setup |
| Health score | 93 · Excellent | 30 · At risk |
| Category | Monitoring & Status | Monitoring & Status |
| License | BSD-3-Clause | GPL-3.0 |
| Language | Python | Go |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 256 MB | 128 MB |
| Deployment | docker, bare-metal | docker, binary |
| GitHub stars | ★ 10,358 | ★ 1,992 |
| First released | 2015 | 2018 |
| Replaces | Pingdom | UptimeRobot, Pingdom |
What are Healthchecks and Statping-ng?
Healthchecks
Healthchecks is a self-hosted service that monitors cron jobs and scheduled tasks using dead man's switch pings. It targets administrators who need to know when a recurring job silently fails. It is deployed via Docker or a Django install.
- Dead man's switch for cron jobs
- Many notification integrations
- Per-check schedules and grace
- REST API
Statping-ng
Statping-ng is a community-maintained status page and uptime monitoring server that tracks services and publishes a public status page. It targets teams wanting a self-hosted status page. It is deployed via Docker or a binary.
- Public status pages
- Service uptime tracking
- Notifier plugins
- Mobile app available
Healthchecks vs Statping-ng: key differences
Healthchecks is written in Python, while Statping-ng is built with Go. Licensing differs — BSD-3-Clause for Healthchecks versus GPL-3.0 for Statping-ng. Statping-ng is the lighter option, starting around 128 MB of RAM against 256 MB for Healthchecks. Healthchecks is the more established project (first released 2015), while Statping-ng arrived in 2018. Healthchecks has the considerably larger community, at 10,358 GitHub stars versus 1,992.
Why pick each one
Choose Healthchecks if…
- Catches silently failing jobs
- Lots of notification channels
- Lightweight
Watch out for
- Narrow use case
- Not for metrics
Choose Statping-ng if…
- Nice status pages
- Single binary
- Easy to host
Watch out for
- Slower development
- Fewer checks than Uptime Kuma
Frequently asked questions
Is Healthchecks or Statping-ng better?
Neither is universally better. Healthchecks has the larger community; both share a easy setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are Healthchecks and Statping-ng free and open-source?
Yes. Healthchecks is licensed under BSD-3-Clause and Statping-ng under GPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Healthchecks and Statping-ng with Docker?
Healthchecks: yes. Statping-ng: yes.
Which is lighter on resources, Healthchecks or Statping-ng?
Statping-ng has the smaller minimum footprint at 128 MB of RAM, compared to about 256 MB for Healthchecks. Real-world usage depends on library size, user count, and enabled features.