World MonitorvsZealot
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| World Monitor | Zealot | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 86/100 | 55/100 |
| Rank in category | #5 of 104 in Monitoring & observability | #17 of 28 in CI/CD |
| GitHub stars | 89 727 | 1 367 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +2 388 | +0 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 17 | 3 |
| Latest release | v2.11.6 · 25 Oct 2026 | 6.2.2 · 25 Jul 2026 |
| Setup | Advanced | Moderate |
| Official Docker image | No | Yes |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Main language | Typescript | Ruby |
Which one should you pick?
World Monitor scores 86/100 against 55/100 for Zealot, so it is the safer default.
World Monitor ships more often: 17 stable releases in the past year, against 3 for Zealot.
If you want the quickest setup, Zealot is easier to run; World Monitor needs more configuration.
World Monitor is growing faster right now (+2 388 stars in 30 days).
World Monitor details →Zealot details →
Swap a project
Keep World Monitor, compare it with
Keep Zealot, compare it with