Grafana Pyroscope vs Apache SkyWalking
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?
Grafana Pyroscope
Continuous profiling for finding performance bottlenecks
VS
Apache SkyWalking
APM and observability for cloud-native architectures
| Feature | Grafana Pyroscope | Apache SkyWalking |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Monitoring & Status | Monitoring & Status |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | Apache-2.0 |
| Language | Go | Java |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Hard |
| Min. RAM | 512 MB | 2,048 MB |
| Deployment | docker, kubernetes, helm | docker, kubernetes, helm |
| GitHub stars | ★ 11,618 | ★ 24,915 |
| First released | 2020 | 2015 |
| Replaces | Datadog Profiler | New Relic, Datadog |
Why pick each one
Choose Grafana Pyroscope if…
- Pinpoints performance hotspots
- Scales efficiently
Choose Apache SkyWalking if…
- Full observability suite
- Strong Apache governance
Frequently asked questions
Is Grafana Pyroscope or Apache SkyWalking better?
Neither is universally better. Apache SkyWalking has the larger community, while Grafana Pyroscope is simpler to set up (medium difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are Grafana Pyroscope and Apache SkyWalking free and open-source?
Yes. Grafana Pyroscope is licensed under AGPL-3.0 and Apache SkyWalking under Apache-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Grafana Pyroscope and Apache SkyWalking with Docker?
Grafana Pyroscope: yes. Apache SkyWalking: yes.