TL;DR verdict

Uptime Kuma is the stronger choice when the deciding factor is day-to-day status page tools workflow fit, while Gatus has the clearer case when pricing shape, deployment control, or rollout risk matters more. For software teams, the practical decision is not feature count; it is which product better supports teams comparing workflow fit, pricing, and operational control without forcing a costly migration six months later.

Quick comparison

FeatureUptime KumaGatus
Starting priceFree planFree plan
Free planYesYes
Open sourceYesYes
Self-hostableYesYes
G2 ratingNot listedNot listed
Best forteams that want a mature, full-featured optionteams that want open-source, self-hosted control
Starting priceFree plan available; paid tiers depend on usage and plan limits.Free plan available; paid tiers depend on usage and plan limits.
Free planYesYes
Open sourceYesYes
Self-hostableYesYes
Deployment modelself-hostedself-hosted
Best forteams that want a mature, full-featured optionteams that want open-source, self-hosted control
Primary riskRequires internal ownership for hosting, upgrades, security patches, or support expectations.Requires internal ownership for hosting, upgrades, security patches, or support expectations.

Core workflow fit

Winner: Uptime Kuma

Winner: Uptime Kuma. For core workflow fit, Uptime Kuma is the safer default because its catalog profile fits the way teams usually evaluate this decision: workflow fit, rollout cost, ownership model, and how quickly the team can prove value with real data. Uptime Kuma is positioned as open-source uptime monitoring, while Gatus is positioned as open-source health dashboard; that difference matters when the comparison moves from a feature checklist into daily operation. If your team is using this category for the workflow the category is supposed to support, test the winner against one production workflow, one admin workflow, and one reporting workflow before committing. Gatus can still be the better pick when its ecosystem, existing contracts, or migration path reduces change management, but it asks for a more deliberate rollout plan.

Ease of adoption

Winner: Gatus

Winner: Gatus. For ease of adoption, Gatus is the safer default because its catalog profile fits the way teams usually evaluate this decision: workflow fit, rollout cost, ownership model, and how quickly the team can prove value with real data. Uptime Kuma is positioned as open-source uptime monitoring, while Gatus is positioned as open-source health dashboard; that difference matters when the comparison moves from a feature checklist into daily operation. If your team is using this category for the workflow the category is supposed to support, test the winner against one production workflow, one admin workflow, and one reporting workflow before committing. Uptime Kuma can still be the better pick when its ecosystem, existing contracts, or migration path reduces change management, but it asks for a more deliberate rollout plan. Adoption also depends on who touches the system every week. A tool that is powerful for admins but slow for contributors creates shadow spreadsheets, skipped updates, and cleanup meetings. In this pair, Gatus has the clearer adoption story for teams that want less training friction.

Reporting and visibility

Winner: Gatus

Winner: Gatus. For reporting and visibility, Gatus is the safer default because its catalog profile fits the way teams usually evaluate this decision: workflow fit, rollout cost, ownership model, and how quickly the team can prove value with real data. Uptime Kuma is positioned as open-source uptime monitoring, while Gatus is positioned as open-source health dashboard; that difference matters when the comparison moves from a feature checklist into daily operation. If your team is using this category for the workflow the category is supposed to support, test the winner against one production workflow, one admin workflow, and one reporting workflow before committing. Uptime Kuma can still be the better pick when its ecosystem, existing contracts, or migration path reduces change management, but it asks for a more deliberate rollout plan. Governance is where hidden costs show up. Compare permission boundaries, audit needs, export options, SSO expectations, and whether the deployment model matches your security review.

Integrations and automation

Winner: Gatus

Winner: Gatus. For integrations and automation, Gatus is the safer default because its catalog profile fits the way teams usually evaluate this decision: workflow fit, rollout cost, ownership model, and how quickly the team can prove value with real data. Uptime Kuma is positioned as open-source uptime monitoring, while Gatus is positioned as open-source health dashboard; that difference matters when the comparison moves from a feature checklist into daily operation. If your team is using this category for the workflow the category is supposed to support, test the winner against one production workflow, one admin workflow, and one reporting workflow before committing. Uptime Kuma can still be the better pick when its ecosystem, existing contracts, or migration path reduces change management, but it asks for a more deliberate rollout plan.

Admin and governance

Winner: Uptime Kuma

Winner: Uptime Kuma. For admin and governance, Uptime Kuma is the safer default because its catalog profile fits the way teams usually evaluate this decision: workflow fit, rollout cost, ownership model, and how quickly the team can prove value with real data. Uptime Kuma is positioned as open-source uptime monitoring, while Gatus is positioned as open-source health dashboard; that difference matters when the comparison moves from a feature checklist into daily operation. If your team is using this category for the workflow the category is supposed to support, test the winner against one production workflow, one admin workflow, and one reporting workflow before committing. Gatus can still be the better pick when its ecosystem, existing contracts, or migration path reduces change management, but it asks for a more deliberate rollout plan.

Cost at scale

Winner: Gatus

Winner: Gatus. For cost at scale, Gatus is the safer default because its catalog profile fits the way teams usually evaluate this decision: workflow fit, rollout cost, ownership model, and how quickly the team can prove value with real data. Uptime Kuma is positioned as open-source uptime monitoring, while Gatus is positioned as open-source health dashboard; that difference matters when the comparison moves from a feature checklist into daily operation. If your team is using this category for the workflow the category is supposed to support, test the winner against one production workflow, one admin workflow, and one reporting workflow before committing. Uptime Kuma can still be the better pick when its ecosystem, existing contracts, or migration path reduces change management, but it asks for a more deliberate rollout plan. Cost should be modeled over twelve months, not from the first plan label. Include seats, usage, storage, integrations, onboarding, and the time spent recreating automations.

Pricing deep-dive

Uptime Kuma

  • Free plan: available for evaluation or limited production use in status page tools.
  • Entry paid tier: starts from free, with paid usage or feature upgrades varying by plan.
  • Pricing model: open-source; license is open-source; deployment type is self-hosted.
  • Open-source economics: subscription cost may be replaced by hosting, upgrades, backups, and internal maintenance.

Gatus

  • Free plan: available for evaluation or limited production use in status page tools.
  • Entry paid tier: starts from free, with paid usage or feature upgrades varying by plan.
  • Pricing model: open-source; license is open-source; deployment type is self-hosted.
  • Open-source economics: subscription cost may be replaced by hosting, upgrades, backups, and internal maintenance.

Pricing verdict: Neither product has a clean universal pricing win from catalog data alone. Uptime Kuma is cataloged as: Free plan: available for evaluation or limited production use in status page tools. Entry paid tier: starts from free, with paid usage or feature upgrades varying by plan. Pricing model: open-source; license is open-source; deployment type is self-hosted. Open-source economics: subscription cost may be replaced by hosting, upgrades, backups, and internal maintenance. Gatus is cataloged as: Free plan: available for evaluation or limited production use in status page tools. Entry paid tier: starts from free, with paid usage or feature upgrades varying by plan. Pricing model: open-source; license is open-source; deployment type is self-hosted. Open-source economics: subscription cost may be replaced by hosting, upgrades, backups, and internal maintenance. Build the comparison around the plan that supports your real production workflow, not the cheapest plan each vendor advertises.

How to migrate from Uptime Kuma to Gatus

Data export
Export the core status page tools records from Uptime Kuma first: users, projects, configuration, activity history, files, comments, reports, and any objects your team relies on weekly. Use CSV, JSON, API export, or vendor backup options where available, and keep a read-only archive until the new workflow has survived one reporting cycle.
Import support
Start with Gatus's native importer or API, then migrate a representative workspace before moving the whole account. The first test should include permissions, integrations, notifications, and one real production workflow so gaps appear before stakeholders are invited.
Does not migrate
Automations, saved reports, dashboards, custom roles, webhooks, notification rules, SSO settings, billing configuration, and integration credentials usually need manual rebuilds. Historical activity may import as flat records rather than fully functional native events.
Time estimate
Plan two to five days for a small team with simple configuration, one to three weeks for a mid-size team, and longer if compliance review, data cleanup, custom fields, or external users are involved.

What real users say

Uptime Kuma: Uptime Kuma users usually praise the parts that match its positioning as open-source uptime monitoring. The recurring criticism is predictable: once teams push it beyond that core use case, they run into plan limits, integration gaps, admin overhead, or migration work that was not obvious during evaluation.

Gatus: Gatus users usually praise the parts that match its positioning as open-source health dashboard. Complaints tend to cluster around pricing clarity, onboarding effort, reporting flexibility, or the amount of manual process needed to keep the system accurate over time.

Sources: Pattern synthesized from catalog data, vendor positioning, public pricing availability, and common review themes; verify current review excerpts before quoting users directly.

Final verdict

Choose Uptime Kuma if...

  • Choose Uptime Kuma if your team needs open-source uptime monitoring and that positioning matches the work people will do every week.
  • Choose Uptime Kuma if its pricing model, deployment type, and governance profile are easier to approve than forcing Gatus into the same workflow.
  • Choose Uptime Kuma if migration risk is lower because your current data model, integrations, or team habits already resemble its default setup.

Choose Gatus if...

  • Choose Gatus if your team needs open-source health dashboard and would otherwise customize Uptime Kuma heavily to fit.
  • Choose Gatus if it gives software teams a clearer path for the workflow being compared without adding admin work after launch.
  • Choose Gatus if its free plan, paid entry point, open-source status, or managed service model better fits your procurement constraints.

Consider neither if: Consider neither if you need a fundamentally different status page tools model: open-source control when both are managed, managed support when both require ownership, or a narrower specialist tool for one workflow. In that case, review the broader category page and adjacent comparisons before committing.