# uptime-kuma vs zookeeper

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

| | uptime-kuma | zookeeper |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 88/100 ✓ | 73/100 |
| Rank in category | #3 of 104 in Monitoring & observability | #1 of 8 in Configuration Management |
| GitHub stars | 93 036 ✓ | 12 827 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +1 289 ✓ | +17 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 19 ✓ | 0 |
| Latest release | 2.5.8 · 26 Oct 2026 | — |
| Setup | Easy ✓ | Moderate |
| Official Docker image | Yes ✓ | No |
| License | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| Main language | JavaScript | Java |

## Which one should you pick?

uptime-kuma scores 88/100 against 73/100 for zookeeper, so it is the safer default.

uptime-kuma ships more often: 19 stable releases in the past year, against 0 for zookeeper.

If you want the quickest setup, uptime-kuma is easier to run; zookeeper needs more configuration.

uptime-kuma is growing faster right now (+1 289 stars in 30 days).

## Details

- [uptime-kuma](https://selfhost.directory/project/uptime-kuma) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/uptime-kuma.md)
- [zookeeper](https://selfhost.directory/project/zookeeper) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/zookeeper.md)

---
Source: https://selfhost.directory/compare/uptime-kuma-vs-zookeeper