# World Monitor vs zookeeper

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

| | World Monitor | zookeeper |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 86/100 ✓ | 73/100 |
| Rank in category | #5 of 104 in Monitoring & observability | #1 of 8 in Configuration Management |
| GitHub stars | 89 719 ✓ | 12 826 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +2 430 ✓ | +16 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 17 ✓ | 0 |
| Latest release | v2.11.6 · 25 Oct 2026 | — |
| Setup | Advanced | Moderate ✓ |
| Official Docker image | No | No |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | Apache-2.0 |
| Main language | Typescript | Java |

## Which one should you pick?

World Monitor scores 86/100 against 73/100 for zookeeper, so it is the safer default.

World Monitor ships more often: 17 stable releases in the past year, against 0 for zookeeper.

If you want the quickest setup, zookeeper is easier to run; World Monitor needs more configuration.

World Monitor is growing faster right now (+2 430 stars in 30 days).

## Details

- [World Monitor](https://selfhost.directory/project/world-monitor) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/world-monitor.md)
- [zookeeper](https://selfhost.directory/project/zookeeper) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/zookeeper.md)

---
Source: https://selfhost.directory/compare/world-monitor-vs-zookeeper