HealthchecksvsStash
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| Healthchecks | Stash | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 73/100 | 78/100 |
| Rank in category | #2 of 12 in Uptime Monitoring | #2 of 142 in Media Management |
| GitHub stars | 10 464 | 13 306 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +106 | +300 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 12 | 7 |
| Latest release | v5.0.3 · 27 Oct 2026 | latest_develop · 24 Jun 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?
Stash scores 78/100 against 73/100 for Healthchecks, so it is the safer default.
Healthchecks ships more often: 12 stable releases in the past year, against 7 for Stash.
If you want the quickest setup, Stash is easier to run; Healthchecks needs more configuration.
Stash is growing faster right now (+300 stars in 30 days).
Healthchecks details →Stash details →
Swap a project
Keep Healthchecks, compare it with
Keep Stash, compare it with