SolidPing vs Hyperping
Hyperping is the most thoughtfully designed small monitoring SaaS we have looked at. Bootstrapped since 2018, 18 probe regions, and a couple of design decisions we think are simply correct: every failure is replayed across all your other selected regions before an alert fires, and the operational object (an outage, which pages you) is kept separate from the customer-facing object (an incident, which goes on the status page). Most tools conflate those two and it shows.
Both sides of this page are hosted services. Hyperping is hosted only, so the fair comparison is against SolidPing Cloud — our plans, our six regions, our limits — not against the free self-hosted build. The self-hosted build changes the answer for some teams and there is a section about it below, but it is not what the table compares.
The comparison comes down to scope and cost. Hyperping does six monitor types very well, with better browser checks than ours; SolidPing does forty.
Prices below were last checked in July 2026. If we've gotten a detail wrong, please open an issue.
At a glance
| SolidPing Cloud | Hyperping | |
|---|---|---|
| Model | Hosted — the same AGPL-3.0 build also self-hosts, free | Hosted only |
| Owner | Independent | Independent, bootstrapped |
| Free tier | 100 monitors, 10 checks/min, 5 seats, on-call included | 20 monitors, 5-minute checks, 1 status page |
| Entry paid | €5/mo — 1,000 monitors, 20 checks/min, 10 seats | $24/mo |
| Ladder | €0 → €5 → €15 → €45 | $24 → $74 → $249 → Enterprise |
| What is metered | Monitors, checks/minute, seats, private agents, status-page domains | Monitors, browser checks, server agents, seats |
| Minimum interval | 10 s on every plan, spent from your checks/minute budget (browser checks 60 s, JS 30 s) | 30 s Pro · 20 s Business · 10 s Enterprise |
| Check types | 40 | HTTP, TCP port, ICMP ping, DNS, cron healthchecks, browser, server agents |
| Shared probe regions | 6 — Gravelines, Paris, Lauterbourg (FR), Nuremberg (DE), Kansas City (US), Tokyo (JP) | 18 documented regions |
| Failure confirmation | Per-region results across the regions you selected | Failure replayed across all other selected regions; alerts at ≥3 confirming |
| Browser checks | Headless Chrome over CDP — load a page, wait for a selector, match a keyword, screenshot on failure | Playwright TS/JS scripts, quota-tiered 3 / 10 / 25 per plan, with a cross-region "Double Check" retry |
| Core Web Vitals | No | LCP, CLS, TBT, FCP, TTFB, automatically |
| Body assertions | String, regex and JSONPath | Literal substring only |
| HTTP auth fields | Native basic and bearer auth | Raw Authorization header only |
| Databases, queues, SNMP, SSH, mail | Yes | No |
| Private-network probing | Deported agents you run: 1 on Free, 2 / 3 / 5 on paid — the server cannot decrypt their credentials | Not available |
| On-call & escalation | Rotations, overrides, iCal feeds, multi-step escalation, on every plan | Rotations with concurrent shifts, escalation policies |
| Notification channels | 15 on hosted plans — SMS, voice and WhatsApp are not included | Email, SMS, Slack, and the usual chat targets |
| Status pages | Public pages, sections, custom domains (1 / 3 / 10 by plan), subscribers, Atom feed | Public pages with subscribers, localised in seven languages |
| Interface languages | English, French, German, Spanish | Status pages localised in seven languages |
| Config as code | YAML export / import / apply, REST API, sp CLI | REST API; community Terraform provider only |
| Data location | Our infrastructure, in France | Hyperping's infrastructure |
Where SolidPing Cloud is the stronger choice
Six monitor types against forty. Hyperping watches HTTP, ports, ping, DNS, cron heartbeats and browsers. SolidPing adds PostgreSQL, MySQL, MSSQL, Oracle, Redis, MongoDB and ClickHouse; SMTP, IMAP and POP3, plus a passive email-reception check; gRPC, Kafka, RabbitMQ, MQTT, SIP; SSH, RDP, FTP, SFTP; SNMP, Docker, Kubernetes, Prometheus; UDP, NTP, DNSBL; WebSocket; game servers; SSL and domain expiry; and sandboxed JavaScript checks.
Assertions past substring matching. Hyperping matches a literal string in the body,
and has no native basic- or bearer-auth fields — you hand-roll an Authorization header.
SolidPing does string, regex and JSONPath, with auth as first-class configuration.
Price, at both ends. Hyperping's free tier is 20 monitors at five-minute intervals and the first paid step is $24/mo. SolidPing's free tier is 100 monitors with no interval gating, and paid starts at €5 for 1,000 monitors and 20 checks a minute. At the top of our ladder, €45 buys 5,000 monitors and 500 checks a minute — Hyperping's $249 tier is a different order of price for a smaller number of things watched.
10-second checks without an Enterprise contract. Hyperping's fastest interval is gated to its top tier. SolidPing's floor is 10 seconds on every plan, including Free — what it costs you is checks-per-minute budget, not a plan upgrade. (Browser checks are the exception at 60 seconds, and JavaScript checks at 30.)
Anything that has to stay inside your network. Hyperping probes from its own regions and offers nothing private. SolidPing Cloud lets you run deported agents inside your network — one on Free, up to five on Scale — and they generate their own keypair locally and receive age-sealed credentials, so a check that runs only in your private region is structurally unreadable by our servers.
Maintenance that suppresses alerts without stopping collection. Hyperping's maintenance mode pauses the monitor, so you lose the data for the window. SolidPing keeps checking.
On-call is not a separate tier. Rotations, overrides, iCal feeds and multi-step escalation are on every plan, Free included.
Where Hyperping is the stronger choice
Eighteen regions against our six. Their footprint is three times ours and spread far wider; our shared regions are four European, one North American and one Asian. If your users are in South America, India or Australia and you want a probe there today without deploying anything, they have one and we do not.
Multi-region confirmation is better than ours. Their failure path is genuinely good: a failing check is replayed across every other selected region and only alerts when at least three confirm, and the webhook payload carries the whole multi-region trace so a receiver can do its own correlation. SolidPing reports per-region results but does not have that quorum step. We would like to; it is on the list.
Browser checks are real Playwright, and ours are not. Hyperping runs Playwright TypeScript/JavaScript scripts as monitors, with a "Double Check" retry that replays a failed run from a different region before declaring an outage. A team that already has a Playwright suite can lift a login or checkout flow straight into monitoring. SolidPing's browser check drives headless Chrome over the DevTools Protocol and does one thing: load a URL, wait for a selector, match a keyword, capture a screenshot when it fails. It is not a script runner, and multi-step user journeys are not something you can port to it. If scripted browser flows are the point, Hyperping wins this outright — and so does Checkly, for the same reason.
Core Web Vitals from those browser checks, automatically. LCP, CLS, TBT, FCP and TTFB with no script instrumentation. We do not collect these.
The outage-versus-incident split. Keeping the thing that pages you separate from the thing customers read is a cleaner data model than most of this market has, including us.
Concurrent shifts in on-call rotations. N people on at once, as a first-class field. SolidPing's rotations put one person on at a time.
SMS is included and ours is not. Hyperping alerts by SMS on its plans. SolidPing Cloud does not include SMS, voice or WhatsApp at all today — the carriers bill per message and we have not priced them in. Every other channel is on every plan; if a text message is how your team gets woken up, that is a real gap and it is not a small one.
Status pages localised in seven languages, with localised incident titles and updates as a data-model concept. SolidPing ships in English, French, German and Spanish, and its status pages follow.
A healthcheck /start endpoint, so a cron job's duration is measured rather than
inferred. We do not have one — a job that hangs mid-run looks fine to us until it misses
its window.
The other model, on both sides
Hyperping does not self-host. There is no on-premise build and no private control plane; everything it checks, it checks from its own regions with credentials it holds.
SolidPing does, and that build has no plan at all. The same Go binary, AGPL-3.0, against your own SQLite or PostgreSQL: unlimited monitors, unlimited check rate, unlimited private agents and status-page domains, 30 members by default and raisable in config — and SMS, voice and WhatsApp all work, because you bring your own Twilio account. What you pay instead is a VM and the upgrades, and you own the pager when the monitoring itself breaks. If the row that stopped you in the table above was a plan cap or the missing SMS, that is the version to look at.
Which should you pick?
Pick Hyperping if your monitoring is websites and endpoints, you want somebody else's eighteen regions doing the confirming, you have Playwright tests you would like to run as monitors, or the outage-versus-incident separation matches how your team actually works. It is a well-built product and the design choices behind it are better than its size suggests.
Pick SolidPing if the list of things to watch includes databases, queues, mail or hosts as well as URLs, if $24/mo for twenty-odd monitors is the wrong shape for what you are doing, or if any of it has to run inside your own network. Start on the free hosted plan; if the caps or the missing SMS get in the way, the self-hosted build has neither.