HealthchecksvsHiClaw
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| Healthchecks | HiClaw | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 73/100 | 67/100 |
| Rank in category | #2 of 12 in Uptime Monitoring | #32 of 209 in AI Agents |
| GitHub stars | 10 465 | 5 885 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +107 | +222 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 12 | 15 |
| Latest release | v5.0.3 · 27 Oct 2026 | v1.2.5 · 16 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Easy |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | BSD-3-Clause | Apache-2.0 |
| Main language | Python | Go |
Which one should you pick?
Healthchecks scores 73/100 against 67/100 for HiClaw, so it is the safer default.
HiClaw ships more often: 15 stable releases in the past year, against 12 for Healthchecks.
If you want the quickest setup, HiClaw is easier to run; Healthchecks needs more configuration.
HiClaw is growing faster right now (+222 stars in 30 days).
Healthchecks details →HiClaw details →
Swap a project
Keep Healthchecks, compare it with
Keep HiClaw, compare it with