Pulse Monitor vs Uptime Kuma

A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted monitoring & status options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.

Not the right match-up?
FeaturePulse MonitorUptime Kuma
CategoryMonitoring & StatusMonitoring & Status
LicenseMITMIT
LanguageGoJavaScript
Setup difficultyEasyEasy
Min. RAM256 MB256 MB
Deploymentdockerdocker
GitHub stars★ 6,509★ 89,960
First released20242021
ReplacesDatadogPingdom, UptimeRobot

Why pick each one

Choose Pulse Monitor if…

  • Released under the MIT license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Mature project with 6.5k GitHub stars
Pulse Monitor details

Choose Uptime Kuma if…

  • Very easy to use
  • Great notifications
  • Lightweight
Uptime Kuma details

Frequently asked questions

Is Pulse Monitor or Uptime Kuma better?

Neither is universally better. Uptime Kuma has the larger community; both share a easy setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.

Are Pulse Monitor and Uptime Kuma free and open-source?

Yes. Pulse Monitor is licensed under MIT and Uptime Kuma under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Pulse Monitor and Uptime Kuma with Docker?

Pulse Monitor: yes. Uptime Kuma: yes.

Related comparisons