Choosing an uptime monitor means distinguishing a maintained self-hosted or hosted project from one that is merely popular. This September 2026 section uses the supplied ToolVitals records, including ToolVitals scores, health and shipping scores, project descriptions, openness and license labels, and GitHub star counts.
The ranking includes open/source-visible tools and orders them by ToolVitals score descending, with health and shipping used to break equal composite scores. GitHub stars provide context only and do not determine placement.
Rankings
| Rank | Tool | Openness | License | Health | Shipping | GitHub Stars | Score | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Uptime Kuma | OSI-approved OSS | MIT | 97 | 95 | 91163 | 96 | 🟢 Excellent |
| 2 | Checkmate | OSI-approved OSS | AGPL-3.0 | 96 | 96 | 10803 | 96 | 🟢 Excellent |
| 3 | Kener | OSI-approved OSS | MIT | 95 | 94 | 5155 | 95 | 🟢 Excellent |
| 4 | Uptimekit | OSI-approved OSS | MIT | 93 | 92 | 111 | 92 | 🟢 Excellent |
| 5 | Kuvasz | OSI-approved OSS | AGPL-3.0 | 92 | 92 | 629 | 92 | 🟢 Excellent |
| 6 | Yet Another Status Page | OSI-approved OSS | MIT | 92 | 92 | 33 | 92 | 🟢 Excellent |
| 7 | OpsKnight | OSI-approved OSS | Apache-2.0 | 89 | 93 | 41 | 91 | 🟢 Excellent |
| 8 | OpenStatus | OSI-approved OSS | AGPL-3.0 | 92 | 86 | 9094 | 90 | 🟢 Excellent |
| 9 | Maintenant | OSI-approved OSS | AGPL-3.0 | 87 | 92 | 493 | 89 | 🟢 Excellent |
| 10 | Healthchecks | OSI-approved OSS | BSD-3-Clause | 85 | 90 | 10314 | 87 | 🟢 Excellent |
| 11 | ohstatus | OSI-approved OSS | GPL-2.0 | 85 | 85 | 1 | 85 | 🟢 Excellent |
| 12 | Arki Uptime | OSI-approved OSS | MIT | 84 | 86 | 0 | 85 | 🟢 Excellent |
| 13 | Telegai Status | OSI-approved OSS | MIT | 84 | 86 | 0 | 85 | 🟢 Excellent |
| 14 | Upptime | OSI-approved OSS | MIT | 82 | 84 | 17154 | 83 | 🟢 Excellent |
| 15 | Fettle | OSI-approved OSS | Apache-2.0 | 81 | 82 | 281 | 82 | 🟢 Excellent |
| 16 | Uptimer | OSI-approved OSS | MIT | 80 | 68 | 0 | 75 | 🟢 Good |
| 17 | Gatus | OSI-approved OSS | Apache-2.0 | 74 | 56 | 12038 | 67 | 🟢 Good |
| 18 | Harbour Space Status | OSI-approved OSS | MIT | 69 | 52 | 0 | 62 | 🟢 Good |
| 19 | Warden | OSI-approved OSS | AGPL-3.0 | 65 | 57 | 3 | 62 | 🟢 Good |
| 20 | Upstat | OSI-approved OSS | MIT | 59 | 44 | 201 | 53 | 🟡 Fair |
| 21 | Pongo | OSI-approved OSS | MIT | 59 | 41 | 31 | 52 | 🟡 Fair |
| 22 | bitwobbly | OSI-approved OSS | Apache-2.0 | 49 | 33 | 3 | 43 | 🟡 Fair |
| 23 | PongHub | OSI-approved OSS | MIT | 50 | 29 | 226 | 41 | 🟡 Fair |
| 24 | STS | OSI-approved OSS | Apache-2.0 | 41 | 25 | 24 | 35 | 🔴 Needs Attention |
| 25 | CheckCle | OSI-approved OSS | MIT | 38 | 14 | 2950 | 28 | 🔴 Needs Attention |
| 26 | Stremio Status | OSI-approved OSS | GPL-3.0 | 33 | 18 | 89 | 27 | 🔴 Needs Attention |
| 27 | CState | OSI-approved OSS | MIT | 32 | 0 | 2893 | 19 | 🔴 Needs Attention |
| 28 | Lunalytics | OSI-approved OSS | AGPL-3.0 | 29 | 5 | 739 | 19 | 🔴 Needs Attention |
| 29 | Uni Status | OSI-approved OSS | AGPL-3.0 | 25 | 4 | 4 | 17 | 🔴 Needs Attention |
| 30 | UptimeMonitor Server | OSI-approved OSS | GPL-3.0 | 18 | 5 | 67 | 13 | 🔴 Needs Attention |
| 31 | Peekaping | OSI-approved OSS | MIT | 18 | 4 | 1188 | 12 | 🔴 Needs Attention |
| 32 | Status Page Aggregator | OSI-approved OSS | MIT | 17 | 0 | 21 | 10 | 🔴 Needs Attention |
| 33 | ClearStatus | OSI-approved OSS | Apache-2.0 | 15 | 0 | 1 | 9 | 🔴 Needs Attention |
| 34 | Reachable | OSI-approved OSS | AGPL-3.0 | 13 | 3 | 3 | 9 | 🔴 Needs Attention |
| 35 | Aether Status | OSI-approved OSS | Apache-2.0 | 14 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 🔴 Needs Attention |
| 36 | Model Status | OSI-approved OSS | MIT | 11 | 0 | 44 | 7 | 🔴 Needs Attention |
| 37 | Uptimed | OSI-approved OSS | MIT | 10 | 0 | 1 | 6 | 🔴 Needs Attention |
| 38 | Statusphere | OSI-approved OSS | MIT | 8 | 0 | 70 | 5 | 🔴 Needs Attention |
| 39 | server-status | OSI-approved OSS | Apache-2.0 | 7 | 0 | 408 | 4 | 🔴 Needs Attention |
| 40 | Cloudflare Workers Status Page | OSI-approved OSS | MIT | 0 | 0 | 2807 | 0 | 🔴 Needs Attention |
| 41 | Statping | OSI-approved OSS | GPL-3.0 | 0 | 0 | 7290 | 0 | 🔴 Needs Attention |
| 42 | Status Page | OSI-approved OSS | Apache-2.0 | 0 | 0 | 74 | 0 | 🔴 Needs Attention |
| 43 | StatusNook | OSI-approved OSS | MIT | 0 | 0 | 975 | 0 | 🔴 Needs Attention |
Top 3 Highlights
Uptime Kuma ranks first with a ToolVitals score of 96, a health score of 97, and a shipping score of 95. Its supplied description identifies it as a self-hosted monitoring tool. It is labeled OSI-approved OSS and MIT; its 91,163 GitHub stars are popularity context only.
Checkmate ranks second with a ToolVitals score of 96, while its health and shipping scores are both 96. Its supplied description covers server hardware, uptime, response times, and incidents in real time, giving it a broader infrastructure-monitoring profile. It is labeled OSI-approved OSS and AGPL-3.0; its 10,803 GitHub stars do not affect its ranking.
Kener ranks third with a ToolVitals score of 95, a health score of 95, and a shipping score of 94. Its supplied description focuses on status pages and an included feature set, making it a status-page-oriented option among the top three. It is labeled OSI-approved OSS and MIT; its 5,155 GitHub stars are context only.
Want to see the full health, license, shipping, and confidence details for every tool in Uptime Monitoring? Browse all Uptime Monitoring Tools →