Octoprintvsuptime-kuma
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| Octoprint | uptime-kuma | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 73/100 | 88/100 |
| Rank in category | #1 of 22 in 3D Printing | #3 of 104 in Monitoring & observability |
| GitHub stars | 9 167 | 93 036 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +59 | +1 289 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 5 | 19 |
| Latest release | 1.11.8 · 23 Jun 2026 | 2.5.8 · 26 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Easy |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Main language | Python | JavaScript |
Which one should you pick?
uptime-kuma scores 88/100 against 73/100 for Octoprint, so it is the safer default.
uptime-kuma ships more often: 19 stable releases in the past year, against 5 for Octoprint.
If you want the quickest setup, uptime-kuma is easier to run; Octoprint needs more configuration.
uptime-kuma is growing faster right now (+1 289 stars in 30 days).
Octoprint details →uptime-kuma details →