# Healthchecks vs Pulse

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

| | Healthchecks | Pulse |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 73/100 ✓ | 71/100 |
| Rank in category | #2 of 12 in Uptime Monitoring | #2 of 19 in Infrastructure Monitoring |
| GitHub stars | 10 465 ✓ | 6 970 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +107 | +229 ✓ |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 12 | 43 ✓ |
| Latest release | v5.0.3 · 27 Oct 2026 ✓ | helm-chart-6.6.0 · 25 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Easy ✓ |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | BSD-3-Clause | MIT |
| Main language | Python | Go |

## Which one should you pick?

Healthchecks scores 73/100 against 71/100 for Pulse, so it is the safer default.

Pulse ships more often: 43 stable releases in the past year, against 12 for Healthchecks.

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

Pulse is growing faster right now (+229 stars in 30 days).

## Details

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

---
Source: https://selfhost.directory/compare/healthchecks-vs-pulse