Pulse Monitor vs Uptrace
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?
Pulse Monitor
Self-hosted monitoring of Proxmox and infrastructure
VS
Uptrace
OpenTelemetry-based tracing, metrics, and logs tool
| Feature | Pulse Monitor | Uptrace |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Monitoring & Status | Monitoring & Status |
| License | MIT | BSL-1.1 |
| Language | Go | Go |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 256 MB | 512 MB |
| Deployment | docker | docker, kubernetes, binary |
| GitHub stars | ★ 6,509 | ★ 4,256 |
| First released | 2024 | 2021 |
| Replaces | Datadog | Datadog, New Relic |
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
Frequently asked questions
Is Pulse Monitor or Uptrace better?
Pulse Monitor is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider Uptrace if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are Pulse Monitor and Uptrace free and open-source?
Yes. Pulse Monitor is licensed under MIT and Uptrace under BSL-1.1. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Pulse Monitor and Uptrace with Docker?
Pulse Monitor: yes. Uptrace: yes.