Hyperping vs UptimeEZ

Beautiful status pages, and real browser checks

Every fact below was read from their own pages on 2026-08-03. Where their page does not mention something, we write "not announced" rather than "cannot do it".

What Hyperping is

Hyperping is a status page product with monitoring attached, and the status page is the reason people buy it: it runs on your own domain and it is the best made of the seven. The free plan is 20 monitors at a five minute interval, paid tiers bring 30 second checks, and the middle tier adds browser checks that drive a real browser through a page, which is the one thing our HTTP reading cannot replace. It is the right choice if what you are really buying is a public page your clients will refresh during an incident, or if a flow has to be clicked through rather than requested. If the status page is not the point and you want thirty sites read in depth for a flat price, the tiers cap the monitor count at 20, then 50, 100 and 1,000, and the browser checks start at the middle tier.

Side by side

11 / 3

UptimeEZ takes 11 of the criteria below, Hyperping takes 3, and 1 are a draw. We chose the criteria, so read the row that matters to you rather than the score.

What you might need Hyperping UptimeEZ
Free hosted tier Advantage: Hyperping. 20 monitors, 5 minute checks None. The self-hosted engine is free forever
Cheapest paid plan 29 USD a month for 50 monitors, annually Advantage: UptimeEZ. 9.90 EUR a month, monitors not counted
Shortest interval 30 seconds on paid tiers 30 seconds
Browser checks Advantage: Hyperping. Yes, ten on the middle tier No, HTTP only
Status page on your own domain Advantage: Hyperping. Yes, it is their speciality Public status page, not on your domain
Reads the rendered layout Not announced Advantage: UptimeEZ. Nine signals and a silhouette
Finds a database error inside a 200 Not announced Advantage: UptimeEZ. Forty-one signatures, no setup
Tells you what to fix The check result Advantage: UptimeEZ. One of twenty-six causes, with the remedy
One read-only link per client Status pages Advantage: UptimeEZ. One link per client, scoped to their sites
Runs on your own server No, hosted only Advantage: UptimeEZ. Yes, MIT licensed, or hosted by us
Source code you can read Closed Advantage: UptimeEZ. MIT, the whole engine
Unlimited monitors and sites No, 20 free then 50, 100, 1,000 Advantage: UptimeEZ. Yes, the hosted plan does not count them
Where the measurements are stored Not announced on the pricing page Advantage: UptimeEZ. Dedicated OVH server in France, one database per customer
Interface languages English Advantage: UptimeEZ. Ten, including the client report
Leaving with your history Not announced Advantage: UptimeEZ. Exportable, and the instance is deleted on request

advantage UptimeEZ advantage Hyperping no tint: too close to call

What we read on their own pages

What Hyperping does well

  • Status pages on your own domain, done better than anyone
  • Browser checks that drive a real browser, 10 on the middle tier
  • A free tier of 20 monitors at a five minute interval
  • 30 second checks on the paid tiers

Limits, as their pages state them

  • The tier sets the monitor count: 20 free, then 50, 100, 1,000
  • Browser checks start at the middle tier
  • Hosted only: no self-hosted install
  • Closed source: you cannot read the code that runs the checks
  • Where the measurements are stored: not announced on the pricing page

Both lists are facts read on their own pages on 2026-08-03, never our opinion of the product.

Where UptimeEZ is better

A status page is what the client refreshes. A diagnosis is what you read before you answer them, and that half is what this engine builds. It scores nine layout signals on the page as it arrives, reads forty-one error signatures that only ever appear inside a 200, and names one of twenty-six causes with the first thing to check, in ten languages. Each client gets a read-only link to their own sites, which is a narrower thing than a public status page and a more useful one when the sites are not yours.

Countable in the engine source, which is public and MIT: src/Check/Css.php for the nine layout signals, src/Check/Database.php for the forty-one error signatures, src/Diagnose.php for the twenty-six causes and their remedies, src/Client.php for the read-only client link.

Where Hyperping is better

Browser checks that drive a real browser through a page, which is the one way to catch things our HTTP reading cannot. Status pages on your own domain, done better than anyone. If a polished public status page is what you are buying, buy theirs.

Source: https://hyperping.com/pricing, read on 2026-08-03. Ours is open to the same reading: github.com/coeurduweb/uptimeez. Found a mistake? Tell us and we will correct it: we would rather be right than flattering. support@uptimeez.com.

Questions we are asked about Hyperping

What my clients want is a status page on our own domain. Is that Hyperping rather than UptimeEZ?

Hyperping, and buy theirs rather than wait for ours. Status pages on your own domain are their speciality and the best made of the seven; UptimeEZ has a public status page and a read-only link per client, but not a page served from your domain. If the object you are buying is the page your clients look at during an outage, that is the whole decision made.

Hyperping drives a real browser. Does that not see everything UptimeEZ sees, and more?

In one respect it sees more: a browser runs the JavaScript, our HTTP reading does not. Their browser checks start at the middle tier and there are ten of them, while UptimeEZ applies nine layout signals and forty-one error signatures to every monitor on every pass. And a browser check reports that it failed, where UptimeEZ names one of twenty-six causes with the first thing to check.

We add two client sites a month. What happens at each of Hyperping's ceilings?

You cross one every time the count passes twenty, then fifty, then a hundred, up to a thousand. Each crossing is a decision made by a number rather than by anything you needed, and the browser checks arrive at the middle tier on the way through. The UptimeEZ hosted plan counts neither monitors nor sites, so the same growth changes nothing on the bill. On price, that is the whole of it.

My clients should each see their own site and nothing else. What do Hyperping and UptimeEZ give?

UptimeEZ gives one read-only link per client, scoped to that client's sites, with no seat to pay for. Hyperping answers the same need with status pages, which is what its pricing page offers for the purpose, and we read nothing there about a view scoped to a single client. A status page and a scoped link are two different objects, and an agency usually wants the second one.

We already pay Hyperping for the status page. Is adding UptimeEZ paying twice?

Not for the same thing. Their tier keeps the status page your clients refresh, which nothing on our side replaces; the 9.90 EUR a month buys the reading of the pages themselves, the layout signals and the database errors printed inside a valid response. Point both at the same sites for a month and count how often the second bill catches something first.

Out of these five questions, Hyperping is the answer to 1 of them rather than UptimeEZ. A comparison that wins every question is not one you should believe, and you have already used one of these tools.

See it read a page for yourself

The demo resets every hour, sends nothing and saves nothing. Or install the engine on your own server: it is the same code.

Or check one address right now, free and without an account