Traffic Sourcevsuptime-kuma
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| Traffic Source | uptime-kuma | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 51/100 | 88/100 |
| Rank in category | #10 of 27 in Analytics | #3 of 104 in Monitoring & observability |
| GitHub stars | 679 | 93 040 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +0 | +1 246 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 0 | 19 |
| Latest release | — | 2.5.8 · 26 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Easy |
| Official Docker image | No | Yes |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Main language | JavaScript | JavaScript |
Which one should you pick?
uptime-kuma scores 88/100 against 51/100 for Traffic Source, so it is the safer default.
uptime-kuma ships more often: 19 stable releases in the past year, against 0 for Traffic Source.
If you want the quickest setup, uptime-kuma is easier to run; Traffic Source needs more configuration.
uptime-kuma is growing faster right now (+1 246 stars in 30 days).
Traffic Source details →uptime-kuma details →
Swap a project
Keep Traffic Source, compare it with
Keep uptime-kuma, compare it with