# automatic-ripping-machine vs uptime-kuma

> Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.

| | automatic-ripping-machine | uptime-kuma |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 67/100 | 88/100 ✓ |
| Rank in category | #10 of 142 in Media Management | #3 of 104 in Monitoring & observability |
| GitHub stars | 5 392 | 93 050 ✓ |
| Stars, last 30 days | +148 | +1 256 ✓ |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 16 | 19 ✓ |
| Latest release | 2.24.4 · 3 Oct 2026 | 2.5.8 · 26 Oct 2026 ✓ |
| Setup | Moderate | Easy ✓ |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Main language | Python | JavaScript |

## Which one should you pick?

uptime-kuma scores 88/100 against 67/100 for automatic-ripping-machine, so it is the safer default.

uptime-kuma ships more often: 19 stable releases in the past year, against 16 for automatic-ripping-machine.

If you want the quickest setup, uptime-kuma is easier to run; automatic-ripping-machine needs more configuration.

uptime-kuma is growing faster right now (+1 256 stars in 30 days).

## Details

- [automatic-ripping-machine](https://selfhost.directory/project/automatic-ripping-machine) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/automatic-ripping-machine.md)
- [uptime-kuma](https://selfhost.directory/project/uptime-kuma) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/uptime-kuma.md)

---
Source: https://selfhost.directory/compare/automatic-ripping-machine-vs-uptime-kuma