Grafana
Open-source observability platform
Static comparison
Grafana has the stronger current ToolVitals signal, but check fit, license class, source coverage, and confidence before switching.
Open-source observability platform
A fancy self-hosted monitoring tool
| Use case | Observability | Uptime Monitoring |
|---|---|---|
| Openness | Open core | OSI-approved OSS |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Health | 99 | 96 |
| Shipping | 99 | 95 |
| ToolVitals score | 99 | 96 |
| Data confidence | 90 | 90 |
| Source coverage | 100 | 95 |
| GitHub stars | 76,658 | 91,163 |
| Forks | 14,715 | 8,385 |
| Watchers | 1,312 | 319 |
| Open issues | 3,320 | 800 |
| Last commit | Sep 11, 2026 | Sep 11, 2026 |
| Commits (30d) | 850 | 70 |
| Commits (90d) | 3,116 | 149 |
| Active contributors (90d) | 97 | 77 |
| Releases (90d) | 26 | 4 |
| Status reason | Commit continuity, contributor activity, and delivery signals are strong. | Commit continuity, contributor activity, and delivery signals are strong. |
Decision notes
Grafana is tracked under Observability, while Uptime Kuma is tracked under Uptime Monitoring.
The overall signal is close; license, source quality, and fit matter more than the headline score.
Grafana is tracked as open core with high confidence in ToolVitals data.
Uptime Kuma is tracked as OSI-approved open source with high confidence in ToolVitals data.
Grafana has the stronger current ToolVitals signal, but check fit, license class, source coverage, and confidence before switching.
Not exactly. ToolVitals classifies them in different use cases, so use this page as a public-signal comparison before checking workflow fit.
No. Sponsors and affiliate links do not affect ToolVitals scores, rankings, risk labels, or evidence display.
Affiliate CTAs, when present, use sponsored links and never affect scores, rankings, risk labels, evidence freshness, or comparison verdicts.