GristvsUptime-Kuma-Web-API
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| Grist | Uptime-Kuma-Web-API | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 75/100 | 39/100 |
| Rank in category | #2 of 10 in Data Management | #12 of 13 in API |
| GitHub stars | 12 011 | 282 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +152 | +0 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 16 | 0 |
| Latest release | v1.7.21 · 9 Oct 2026 | — |
| Setup | Easy | Moderate |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | Apache-2.0 | — |
| Main language | Typescript | Python |
Which one should you pick?
Grist scores 75/100 against 39/100 for Uptime-Kuma-Web-API, so it is the safer default.
Grist ships more often: 16 stable releases in the past year, against 0 for Uptime-Kuma-Web-API.
If you want the quickest setup, Grist is easier to run; Uptime-Kuma-Web-API needs more configuration.
Grist is growing faster right now (+152 stars in 30 days).
Grist details →Uptime-Kuma-Web-API details →
Swap a project
Keep Grist, compare it with
Keep Uptime-Kuma-Web-API, compare it with