# globalping-probe vs Healthchecks

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

| | globalping-probe | Healthchecks |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 48/100 | 73/100 ✓ |
| Rank in category | #29 of 48 in Network Monitoring | #2 of 12 in Uptime Monitoring |
| GitHub stars | 215 | 10 468 ✓ |
| Stars, last 30 days | +0 | +106 ✓ |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 19 ✓ | 12 |
| Latest release | v0.54.0 · 25 Oct 2026 | v5.0.3 · 27 Oct 2026 ✓ |
| Setup | Easy ✓ | Moderate |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | ISC | BSD-3-Clause |
| Main language | Typescript | Python |

## Which one should you pick?

Healthchecks scores 73/100 against 48/100 for globalping-probe, so it is the safer default.

globalping-probe ships more often: 19 stable releases in the past year, against 12 for Healthchecks.

If you want the quickest setup, globalping-probe is easier to run; Healthchecks needs more configuration.

Healthchecks is growing faster right now (+106 stars in 30 days).

## Details

- [globalping-probe](https://selfhost.directory/project/globalping-probe) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/globalping-probe.md)
- [Healthchecks](https://selfhost.directory/project/healthchecks) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/healthchecks.md)

---
Source: https://selfhost.directory/compare/globalping-probe-vs-healthchecks