Healthchecksvspyroscope
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| Healthchecks | pyroscope | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 73/100 | 73/100 |
| Rank in category | #2 of 12 in Uptime Monitoring | #3 of 9 in Application Performance Monitoring |
| GitHub stars | 10 464 | 11 711 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +106 | +42 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 12 | 20 |
| Latest release | v5.0.3 · 27 Oct 2026 | v2.4.2 · 26 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Easy |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | BSD-3-Clause | AGPL-3.0 |
| Main language | Python | Go |
Which one should you pick?
Healthchecks and pyroscope score the same (73/100), so the choice comes down to the details below.
pyroscope ships more often: 20 stable releases in the past year, against 12 for Healthchecks.
If you want the quickest setup, pyroscope is easier to run; Healthchecks needs more configuration.
Healthchecks is growing faster right now (+106 stars in 30 days).
Healthchecks details →pyroscope details →
Swap a project
Keep Healthchecks, compare it with
Keep pyroscope, compare it with