Apache SkyWalking vs Grafana Tempo
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?
Apache SkyWalking
APM and observability for cloud-native architectures
VS
Grafana Tempo
Easy-to-operate, high-scale distributed tracing backend
| Feature | Apache SkyWalking | Grafana Tempo |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Monitoring & Status | Monitoring & Status |
| License | Apache-2.0 | AGPL-3.0 |
| Language | Java | Go |
| Setup difficulty | Hard | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 2,048 MB | 512 MB |
| Deployment | docker, kubernetes, helm | docker, kubernetes, helm |
| GitHub stars | ★ 24,915 | ★ 5,416 |
| First released | 2015 | 2020 |
| Replaces | New Relic, Datadog | Datadog APM |
Why pick each one
Choose Apache SkyWalking if…
- Full observability suite
- Strong Apache governance
Frequently asked questions
Is Apache SkyWalking or Grafana Tempo better?
Neither is universally better. Apache SkyWalking has the larger community, while Grafana Tempo is simpler to set up (medium difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are Apache SkyWalking and Grafana Tempo free and open-source?
Yes. Apache SkyWalking is licensed under Apache-2.0 and Grafana Tempo under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Apache SkyWalking and Grafana Tempo with Docker?
Apache SkyWalking: yes. Grafana Tempo: yes.