Uptime Monitoring & Status Pages
Better Stack Uptime
Rest of world Report an errorPanel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars
Category median
Sovereignty: 1 of 6 dimensions proven
0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by Better Stack, Inc. · betterstack.com
Compare with UptimeRobot → Report an error on this page Is this your product? →
Link to this page
Add ?theme=dark to the image address for dark backgrounds.
The badge shows the category and the month of the latest evaluation, and EU-Made where
that is the product’s provenance. It never shows a score.
Better Stack Uptime at a glance
- Vendor
- Better Stack, Inc.
- Headquarters
- Incorporated in United States source, captured 1 Nov 2026
- Data hosting
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 1 Nov 2026
- Free plan
- Yes, per the vendor’s own page source, captured 1 Nov 2026
- Panel verdict
- The AI panel rates Better Stack Uptime 2.5/5, the mean of 6 judges. Better Stack Uptime is strongest on alerting and on-call, where scores reach 9, and on checks and locations, where they reach 8: ten monitor types at a fastest 30-second interval, an incident created only after a failure from at least 3 of at least 4 default locations, and escalation policies, follow-the-sun schedules and voice, SMS, e-mail, Slack, Teams and push alerts under all-you-can-alert pricing. how scores are made
- As of
- Vendor pages captured 1 Nov 2026; evaluated by the panel 2 Nov 2026. all sources
Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The panel's verdict
Better Stack Uptime is strongest on alerting and on-call, where scores reach 9, and on checks and locations, where they reach 8: ten monitor types at a fastest 30-second interval, an incident created only after a failure from at least 3 of at least 4 default locations, and escalation policies, follow-the-sun schedules and voice, SMS, e-mail, Slack, Teams and push alerts under all-you-can-alert pricing. Its weakest area is sovereignty, topping out at 4: the contracting entity is Better Stack, Inc., a Delaware corporation under New York law, the privacy policy states personal data is processed primarily in the European Union, and the data processing agreement permits transfers to the United States under the Data Privacy Framework and standard contractual clauses. The sharpest split: the skeptic and the e-commerce operations manager scored 0 across the board while remaining scores cluster between 4 and 9, though their write-ups cover the same features. Elsewhere the gaps are single points — status pages at 7-8, pricing transparency at 5-6 — over how far an itemised free tier offsets pages showing no paid uptime tier price.
Speaks for it
- Alerting and on-call draws the highest scores, covering escalation policies with delays, repeats and fallback, follow-the-sun schedules, incident merging, and voice, SMS, e-mail, Slack, Teams and push alerts under all-you-can-alert pricing.
- Ten monitor types are documented, from uptime, keyword and ping to DNS, domain expiry, SSL certificate and TCP/UDP port, plus Playwright browser checks at a fastest 30-second interval.
- False-positive protection is explicit, with every monitor checked from at least 4 locations by default and an incident created only after a failure from at least 3.
- Status pages support a custom subdomain via a single CNAME record, per-component e-mail subscriptions, and private pages behind password, single sign-on or an IP allowlist.
- The free tier is fully specified at $0 per month with 10 monitors & heartbeats and 1 status page, and add-ons carry published unit prices such as single sign-on with Azure or Okta at $5 per user per month (Google single sign-on included) and 100 Playwright minutes $1.
Held against it
- Sovereignty is the lowest-scored area: the contracting entity is Better Stack, Inc., a Delaware corporation under New York law and courts, and the data processing agreement permits transfers to the United States under the Data Privacy Framework and standard contractual clauses.
- We found no public information on an EU contracting entity or EU representative, on named hosting infrastructure, or on subprocessor names and locations.
- The captured pricing shows no paid uptime tier price or monitor-scaling rule and enterprise is a custom quote, so a cost beyond the free tier is not computable from the pages.
- The captured pages give different figures for refunds, with a 60-day money-back guarantee on the pricing page beside terms stating no refund is owed.
- We found no public information on retention of check results (logs at 30 days and error tracking at 90 days are the stated periods), on an SLA with credits, or on the vendor's own incident history.
Best for
- You want on-call scheduling, escalation policies and incident management built into the monitoring tool rather than run as a separate product.
- You maintain many sites and need component-based status pages on custom subdomains, including private pages for internal teams or enterprise customers.
- You manage infrastructure as code and want a documented API, Terraform management, SAML single sign-on and Okta SCIM provisioning with group push.
- You can start on the free tier at $0 per month with 10 monitors & heartbeats and 1 status page, adding options at published unit prices.
Avoid if
- You must contract with a European entity or document a European processing chain — the contracting party is a Delaware corporation under New York law and the data processing agreement permits transfers to the United States.
- You need a computable annual cost before committing — the pages show no paid uptime tier price and leave enterprise at a custom quote.
- You rely on a refund window when prepaying — the captured pages give different figures, a 60-day money-back guarantee on the pricing page beside terms stating no refund is owed.
The scores
| Criterion | Panel median |
|---|---|
| Checks, locations & failure confirmation | 4 of 5 |
| Alerting, escalation & on-call | 4.5 of 5 |
| Status pages & incident communication | 3.5 of 5 |
| API, monitoring as code & team administration | 3.5 of 5 |
| Uptime reports, data & the vendor's own reliability | 3 of 5 |
| European sovereignty | 2 of 5 |
| Pricing transparency | 2.5 of 5 |
Checks, locations & failure confirmation
panel disagrees
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
What can be monitored and how reliably a failure is detected: HTTP(S) with status code and keyword checks, TCP and port, ping, DNS records, SSL certificate and domain expiry, cron jobs and heartbeats, multi-step API checks with assertions, browser or transaction checks of a login or checkout, the shortest check interval, the number and regions of probe locations, the re-check from a second location before an alert, timeouts and response time thresholds, and private locations inside the customer's own network.
0 — Runs no checks of its own; a status page or alerting tool that only receives signals from other monitors.
3 — HTTP checks of a URL at a fixed interval with an up or down result; keyword, SSL, cron and the probe locations are basic or not described.
5 — HTTP(S), keyword, TCP or port, ping and SSL expiry checks, cron or heartbeat monitoring, an interval of one minute or less, several named probe locations, a failure confirmed from a second location before alerting, and response times recorded per check.
8 — Multi-step API checks with assertions on headers and body, browser or transaction checks of a user flow, DNS and domain expiry checks, sub-minute intervals, probe locations listed by city with the confirmation logic documented, private locations or agents for internal services, and maintenance windows that pause checks.
10 — Coverage and accuracy a reliability team runs on: every check type above with code-based checks (for example Playwright or scripted tests) in version control, location-specific thresholds, false-positive handling and probe health published, and the detection method documented so a result can be reproduced.
The Agency Developer
The documented monitor types read like my own checklist for sixty WordPress, TYPO3 and Shopware sites — uptime, keyword, ping, DNS, domain expiry, SSL certificate and TCP/UDP port checks plus heartbeats for cron jobs — and Playwright runs a real Chrome browser for transaction checks. Thirty-second checks from at least four locations, an incident only after a failure from three locations, error screenshots and traceroute output give me the false-positive discipline I want after the expired-certificate phone call. Locations are not named by city and private network monitoring is only mentioned by title, which keeps it below the top. 6 14 3 2 4 13
The SaaS Platform Engineer
The documented monitor types cover HTTP uptime, case-insensitive keyword, ping, TCP/UDP port, DNS, domain expiry, SSL certificate and heartbeat checks, plus API monitors and hosted Playwright browser checks at a 30-second interval, with private network monitoring documented as well. Failure confirmation is stronger than a plain second location: every monitor is checked from at least 4 locations by default and an incident is only created after a check fails from at least 3 locations, with the monitoring IP addresses and User-Agent published for allow-listing. We found no public information on assertions inside multi-step API checks, probe locations named by city, or maintenance windows that pause checks. 2 4 6 13 14
The Customer Support Lead
Nearly every check type my team would ever need is documented: uptime, keyword (case-insensitive), ping, heartbeats with grace periods, Playwright browser checks in a real Chrome instance, API, DNS, domain expiry, SSL certificate and TCP/UDP port, with checks as fast as every 30 seconds. False-positive protection is explicit — every monitor runs from at least 4 locations and an incident is only created after a failure from at least 3 of them — and the monitoring IPs and User-Agent are published for allow-listing, alongside private network monitoring. We found no public information on maintenance windows that pause checks or on published probe health. 2 4 6 13 14
The E-Commerce Operations Manager
The documented monitor types cover uptime, keyword, ping, heartbeat, DNS, domain expiry, SSL, TCP/UDP port and Playwright checks in a real Chrome browser, so a checkout flow can be monitored rather than only the homepage. Checks run as fast as every 30 seconds from at least four locations, and an incident is raised only after a failure from at least three locations — the false-positive protection I need in the spring rush. I did not find a city-level probe list, documented assertions on API check headers and bodies, or maintenance windows that pause checks. 6 14 2 4 13
The Information Security Officer
Every check type I would specify is documented — keyword, ping, DNS, domain expiry, SSL certificate, TCP/UDP port, heartbeats with grace periods, and Playwright browser checks — at a fastest 30-second interval, with an incident raised only after a failure is confirmed from at least three of at least four locations, which is the false-positive discipline I want in a detection record. Monitoring IP addresses and the User-Agent are published for allow-listing and private-network monitoring exists for internal services. We found no public information listing probe locations by city, on per-location failure criteria, or on published probe health. 2 3 4 6 13 14
The Skeptic
Ten documented monitor types from uptime and keyword to DNS, domain expiry, SSL and TCP/UDP port, plus hosted Playwright browser checks at 30-second intervals, is broader coverage than most vendors publish. What earns the score is that the confirmation logic is written down: an incident is created only after a check fails from at least three locations out of a default of four, with an explicit warning that removing locations raises false positives. I still get no probe cities, no description of what an API monitor may assert on headers or body, and private-network monitoring is a heading rather than a documented agent or probe. 2 6 8 13 14
Alerting, escalation & on-call
panel disagrees
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
How the right person learns about a failure: alert channels (email, SMS, phone call, push app, Slack, Microsoft Teams, Telegram, webhooks), alerts to PagerDuty, Opsgenie or similar tools, escalation policies when an alert is not acknowledged, on-call schedules and rotations, acknowledge and resolve from the app, alert grouping and noise reduction, recovery notifications, maintenance windows that mute alerts, and whether SMS and calls are included or charged per message.
0 — No alerting at all; results can only be viewed in the dashboard.
3 — Email alerts and one or two chat integrations; escalation, phone calls and schedules are basic or not described.
5 — Email, SMS, a mobile push app, Slack, Microsoft Teams and webhooks, alerts forwarded to PagerDuty or Opsgenie, per-monitor alert contacts, recovery notifications, a delay or threshold before alerting, and maintenance windows that mute alerts.
8 — Phone call alerts, escalation policies with timeouts, on-call schedules and rotations with overrides, acknowledge and resolve from the app or chat, alert grouping, incident timelines with who did what, and the price of SMS and calls stated per country or included in the plan.
10 — On-call that replaces a separate incident tool: follow-the-sun schedules, escalation across teams, alert routing by service and severity, post-incident reviews generated from the timeline, and delivery of every alert channel monitored and reported.
The Agency Developer
Voice calls, SMS, email, Slack, Teams and push are all listed under an all-you-can-alert pricing model, so I would not be counting messages at 3 a.m. Escalation policies with delays, repeats and fallback to the whole team, follow-the-sun regional schedules, overrides, cover requests, and acknowledge and resolve from Slack or Teams match what a standalone incident tool does, and smart merging with severity-based routing keeps the noise down. I found no public information on whether delivery of each alert channel is itself monitored and reported. 2 15 16 4 8
The SaaS Platform Engineer
Voice call, SMS, e-mail, Slack, Teams and push notifications are all included under the 'all-you-can-alert' pricing, and escalation policies alert in order until the incident is acknowledged, with re-alert delays, escalation to the whole team, reusable policies referencing other policies, follow-the-sun regional schedules, overrides, cover requests and metadata-based routing by severity. Mobile apps, smart incident merging to stop your phone from ringing, and AI-drafted post-mortems from the incident timeline are all documented. The only top-level piece we found no public information on is monitoring and reporting of delivery for every alert channel. 2 4 8 15 16
The Customer Support Lead
Escalation policies are documented end to end: who gets alerted in what order until someone acknowledges, with wait delays, repeats, fallback policies, time-based rules and follow-the-sun routing that notifies whoever is on-call in their local region. Voice call, SMS, e-mail, Slack, Teams and push alerts are included under their "all-you-can-alert pricing", incidents can be merged and acknowledged with one click and resolved from Slack or Teams, and post-mortems are drafted from the channel history and incident timeline. We found no public information on whether delivery of each alert channel is itself monitored and reported. 2 4 8 15 16
The E-Commerce Operations Manager
Voice call, SMS, email, Slack, Teams and push are all listed under all-you-can-alert pricing, so no per-message metering when checkout dies at 2 a.m. Escalation policies with waiting periods and re-alerts, follow-the-sun schedules, overrides, cover requests, incident merging, resolution from Slack or Teams and post-mortems drafted from the incident timeline are all documented; I found no public information on monitored delivery rates for each alert channel. 2 4 15 16 8
The Information Security Officer
Voice call, SMS, e-mail, Slack, Teams and push under an all-you-can-alert pricing model, escalation policies that re-alert and escalate to the entire team if unacknowledged, follow-the-sun regional schedules with overrides and cover requests, incident merging, and acknowledgment and resolution from Slack or the mobile apps — and post-mortems are drafted from the incident timeline. We found no public information showing that delivery of each alert channel is itself monitored and reported, and no named forwarding to PagerDuty or Opsgenie. 2 4 8 15 16
The Skeptic
Escalation policies with steps, delays, re-alerting and fallback, follow-the-sun regional schedules with overrides and cover requests, acknowledge-and-resolve inside Slack or Teams, severity- and metadata-based routing, smart incident merging and post-mortems drafted from the incident timeline — that is nearly a standalone incident tool. Voice, SMS, e-mail, Slack, Teams and push are all listed under 'all-you-can-alert pricing', but the terms reserve the right to set quotas on resource use, and I found no public information on whether delivery of each channel is itself monitored and reported. 2 4 8 9 15 16
Status pages & incident communication
panel disagrees
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
How customers and colleagues are told: public status pages on a custom domain with SSL, components and component groups fed automatically by monitors or set by hand, incident updates and scheduled maintenance announcements, subscribers notified by email, SMS, RSS or webhook, uptime history shown per component, private or password-protected pages for internal teams or single customers, branding and custom CSS, several languages, page templates, and how the status page itself stays online when the main product is down.
0 — No status page of any kind.
3 — A public status page listing monitors with their current state; custom domain, incident updates and subscribers are basic or not described.
5 — Public status pages on a custom domain, components linked to monitors, incident updates and scheduled maintenance, email subscribers, uptime history per component, the vendor's branding removable, and a password-protected or private page option.
8 — Component groups, SMS, RSS and webhook subscribers with per-component subscriptions, private pages with single sign-on or IP restriction, several languages, incident templates, embeddable status widgets, audience-specific pages for single customers, and the status page hosting kept separate from the main service and documented.
10 — Incident communication end to end: incidents drafted from monitor events and approved by a person, updates published to the page, subscribers, chat and social channels at once, a full incident archive with post-mortems, status page uptime published, and accessibility of the page stated.
The Agency Developer
I can give every client a branded page on their own subdomain via a single CNAME record, group monitors into component sections, and let customers subscribe by email to the whole page or selected components. Incident templates, scheduled maintenance announcements, custom CSS and JavaScript, embeddable badges and announcement widgets, and private pages behind password, IP allowlist or single sign-on cover my agency scenarios including enterprise clients, with multi-language support in beta. I found no public information on subscriber channels beyond email or on how the page stays online if the main service goes down. 3 17 18 8
The SaaS Platform Engineer
Custom-domain status pages support sections grouping monitors, heartbeats and third-party services, incident communication templates, embeddable badges and announcements, CSS and JavaScript theming, and e-mail subscriptions to the whole page or just selected components — the automation I want before I want it. Private pages can sit behind a password, an IP allowlist or visitor single sign-on for internal teams or enterprise customers, and multi-language support exists in beta. We found no public information on SMS, RSS or webhook subscribers, or on the status page hosting being kept separate from the main service. 3 8 17 18
The Customer Support Lead
This covers almost everything I ask for: a branded page on our own subdomain via a single CNAME, components customers recognise fed from monitors, heartbeats and third-party services and grouped into sections, incident communication templates, and subscribers who can follow the whole page or only chosen components. For the largest accounts there are private pages protected by password, single sign-on or an IP allowlist, plus custom CSS and JavaScript, beta multi-language support and embeddable announcements, charts and badges. We found no public information on SMS or RSS subscribers or on the status page's own uptime being published. 3 8 17 18
The E-Commerce Operations Manager
Custom domain via a single CNAME, custom CSS and JavaScript, component sections fed by monitors and heartbeats, incident templates, scheduled maintenance, embeddable charts and badges, and per-component email subscriptions are evidenced, and private pages behind password, single sign-on or an IP allowlist let me keep one page for customers and one for the agency. Multi-language support is documented but marked beta; I found no public information on SMS or RSS subscribers or on the status page hosting being kept separate from the main service. 3 17 18 8
The Information Security Officer
A custom domain via a single CNAME, components and sections fed by monitors and heartbeats, incident templates, embeddable badges and announcements, and private pages protected by password, single sign-on or an IP allowlist — the single sign-on protected page for internal teams or a single enterprise customer is exactly the audience separation I look for, with multi-language support in beta. Subscribers are reached by e-mail with per-component choice; we found no public information on SMS, RSS or webhook subscribers, or on how the page stays hosted if the main service is down. 3 17 18
The Skeptic
Custom domain by CNAME, sections grouping monitors, heartbeats and third-party services, incident and maintenance templates, per-component e-mail subscriptions, password-, SSO- and IP-allowlist-protected private pages, translations in beta, embeddable badges and announcements, and CSS plus JavaScript customization make a serious page. Subscriber channels beyond e-mail are not described, however, and the captured pages say nothing about how the status page itself stays online if the vendor's own service goes down. 3 8 17 18
API, monitoring as code & team administration
panel disagrees
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
How the tool fits a team and a deployment pipeline: a documented REST API to create and read monitors, status pages and incidents, a Terraform provider, CLI or monitoring-as-code workflow, checks run from CI/CD before a deploy, bulk import of monitors, integrations with ticketing and chat tools, team members with roles, single sign-on (SAML) and SCIM, audit logs, several teams or client accounts in one organisation, white-label or client reporting for agencies, and two-factor authentication.
0 — No API, no team accounts; one login per account and monitors are set up only by hand.
3 — A web dashboard with a few team members; the API, roles and multi-client set-up are basic or not described.
5 — A documented REST API covering monitors and status pages, webhooks, team members with roles, two-factor authentication, bulk import or a CSV upload of monitors, and several projects, teams or client groups in one account.
8 — A Terraform provider or monitoring-as-code CLI with checks kept in version control, checks triggered from CI/CD, single sign-on (SAML), SCIM provisioning, audit logs, sub-accounts for clients with their own logins, and white-label client reports.
10 — Administration that scales across many teams and clients: every setting reachable by API and code with parity stated, granular roles per resource, SSO enforced with SCIM, audit logs exportable to a SIEM, and agency or reseller accounts with separate billing.
The Agency Developer
A documented JSON:API with Bearer tokens spans monitors, heartbeats, status pages, team members and organization roles, with global and per-team tokens, and Terraform management is explicitly supported — that is the monitoring-as-code base I want. Single sign-on with Okta, Azure or Google, SCIM provisioning with group push that creates teams, and bulk actions that assign an escalation policy to many monitors at once make a sixty-site, multi-team onboarding realistic. I found no public information on audit logs, checks triggered from a deployment pipeline, or white-label client reports. 7 6 12 20 15
The SaaS Platform Engineer
A documented JSON:API REST API spans monitors, heartbeats, on-call and incidents, status pages, metadata, integrations, team members and organization roles, with both global and team-scoped tokens and a Terraform provider, so checks can live in code next to the services they test. Okta, Azure and Google single sign-on and Okta SCIM provisioning with group push creating teams are documented in real detail. We found no public information on audit logs, two-factor authentication, bulk import of monitors, or checks triggered from CI/CD. 5 6 7 12 19 20
The Customer Support Lead
A documented API covers monitors, heartbeats, on-call and incidents, status pages, team members and organization roles, with interactive JSON:API docs plus team-scoped and global tokens, and Better Stack resources can be managed with Terraform. Single sign-on with Okta, Azure or Google and SCIM provisioning from Okta — including group push that creates teams — are documented step by step. We found no public information on audit logs, two-factor authentication or white-label client accounts for agencies. 5 7 12 19 20
The E-Commerce Operations Manager
A documented Incidents API covers monitors, heartbeats, on-call and incidents, status pages, team members and organization roles with team-scoped and global Bearer tokens, and a Terraform provider, Okta SAML single sign-on and SCIM provisioning with group push into teams are all evidenced. I found no public information on audit logs, two-factor authentication, white-label client reports or checks triggered from a deployment pipeline. 7 15 19 20
The Information Security Officer
A documented JSON:API covering monitors, heartbeats, on-call, status pages, team members and organization roles, a Terraform provider, SAML single sign-on with Okta, Azure or Google, and SCIM provisioning with group push — single sign-on before anyone gets a login is satisfied. We found no public information on audit logs, two-factor authentication, bulk import of monitors, or client sub-accounts with white-label reports, and the audit-log gap is the one that would delay my approval under ISO 27001. 5 7 12 19 20
The Skeptic
A JSON:API REST API documented across monitors, heartbeats, incidents, status pages, metadata, team members, organization roles and usage, with team-scoped and global bearer tokens, plus Terraform management, SAML SSO for Okta, Azure and Google, and Okta SCIM with group push that creates teams — the administration story is real and current. I found no public information on audit logs, two-factor authentication, bulk monitor import or white-label client reports, which keeps it a rung below the top. 5 6 7 19 20
Uptime reports, data & the vendor's own reliability
panel disagrees
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
What the record is worth and whether the monitor itself can be trusted: uptime and SLA reports per monitor and period, response time charts and percentiles, scheduled reports by email, client-facing reports, how long check results and incident history are kept, export of results by CSV or API, the vendor's own public status page and incident history, its SLA, the probe IP addresses and user agent published for allow-listing, and an open-source or self-hosted edition.
0 — No history of any kind; only the current state is shown.
3 — An uptime percentage and a response time chart per monitor; retention, export and the vendor's own status are basic or not described.
5 — Uptime and response time reports per monitor and period, SLA reports, scheduled email reports, the retention period of check results stated, CSV or API export, the probe IPs published, and the vendor's own public status page.
8 — Response time percentiles and breakdowns (DNS, connect, TLS, first byte), client-ready branded reports, retention of a year or more stated per plan, a raw export of check results, the vendor's incident history and post-mortems public, and an SLA with credits published.
10 — A record that holds up in an audit: SLA calculations with their method stated, incident records suitable for ISO 27001, NIS2 or DORA evidence, full history exportable in an open format, a self-hosted or open-source edition with feature parity stated, and the vendor's own availability over several years published.
The Agency Developer
Compound SLA reports across selected monitors, MTTA and MTTR, an on-calls overview, response-effort tracking, CSV export that respects filters, and a live CSV URL that auto-refreshes a Google Sheet would let me automate the monthly client reports I currently build by hand. The monitoring IP addresses and user agent are published for allow-listing, and an API endpoint returns response times per monitor. I found no public information on response-time percentiles or breakdowns, the retention period for uptime check results, or a vendor SLA with credits. 21 14 22 4
The SaaS Platform Engineer
Reporting covers incidents overview, MTTA and MTTR, on-calls per team member, response effort, and a compound SLA report across selected monitors, with CSV export that reflects applied filters, a live shareable CSV URL, and a per-monitor response-times API endpoint for the last 24 hours. The probe IP addresses and User-Agent are published and the vendor runs its own system status page. We found no public information on response-time percentiles or timing breakdowns, retention of uptime check results, scheduled e-mail reports, an SLA with credits, or public post-mortems and incident history. 4 14 21 22
The Customer Support Lead
For a contract renewal I could point to a compound SLA report across selected monitors, MTTA and MTTR reports, on-call and response-effort reports per team member, live CSV exports that keep a Google Sheet refreshing automatically, and a documented API endpoint returning a monitor's response times. Retention is stated for logs (30 day logs retention) and error tracking (90 days), and the monitoring IPs and User-Agent are published. We found no public information on response-time percentiles, scheduled e-mail reports, how long uptime history is kept, or a vendor SLA with credits. 4 8 14 21 22
The E-Commerce Operations Manager
Compound SLA reports across selected monitors, MTTA and MTTR reports, response-time data via the API, CSV export reflecting filters, a live auto-refreshing CSV URL for Google Sheets and the monitoring IPs and User-Agent published give me the downtime record to show the agency, and the vendor's own system status page exists. I found no public information on retention of check results, response-time percentiles or an SLA with credits. 21 22 14 4
The Information Security Officer
Incidents MTTA and MTTR reports, a compound SLA report across selected monitors, an on-calls overview and a response-effort report per person from acknowledgment to resolution, exportable as CSV or through the API, with response times retrievable per monitor and the probe IPs and User-Agent published — this is close to the detection-time, response and resolution record an auditor asks for. We found no public information on how long check results are retained (only log retention of 30 days and error tracking of 90 days are stated), on response-time percentiles, on a published SLA with credits, or on the vendor's own incident history. 8 14 21 22
The Skeptic
Compound SLA reports across selected monitors, MTTA and MTTR, on-call and response-effort reports with metadata and resource-group filters, CSV export that honours the filters plus a live shareable CSV URL, response times retrievable by API, and the monitoring IP addresses and User-Agent published in the FAQs — the record is genuinely exportable. But retention is stated only for logs at 30 days and errors at 90 days, never for check results themselves; there is no SLA with credits, no public incident history or post-mortems from the vendor, and its own availability is evidenced only by a 'System status' footer line. 4 8 14 21 22
European sovereignty
panel opinion
panel disagrees
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Who the contracting entity and the parent company are, where account data, alert contacts (names and phone numbers of the people on call), status page subscribers and check results are stored and processed, and who the subprocessors are (hosting, SMS and phone gateways, email delivery, support and payment tools). Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline. Probe locations outside Europe are part of what the product does and are not counted against it; where the data is stored and who processes it is. A self-hosted or open-source edition the customer runs on its own European servers counts as the customer's chain, whatever the vendor's seat.
0 — Non-EU vendor and contracting entity, hosting unstated, subprocessors unnamed, and no data processing agreement offered.
3 — A privacy policy and a data processing agreement exist, but hosting location is unstated or non-EU and the subprocessors are not listed.
5 — EU hosting available and an EU contracting entity or EU representative, but parts of the chain (SMS and call gateways, email, support, payment) run through non-EU providers without a stated safeguard.
8 — EU hosting on named infrastructure, EU contracting entity, subprocessors listed with their locations, a data processing agreement published, and security certifications (ISO 27001, SOC 2) stated — or a self-hosted edition documented that keeps every record on the customer's own servers.
10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: European ownership, entity, hosting and every subprocessor, or a self-hosted open-source edition with no call home, data export and deletion documented, and certifications published with their scope rather than implied.
The Agency Developer
The contracting party is Better Stack, Inc., a Delaware corporation under New York law with exclusive New York jurisdiction, and the data processing agreement permits transfers to the United States and other locations by Better Stack and its subprocessors. The mitigations are published: a public DPA relying on the EU-US, Swiss-US and UK-US Data Privacy Frameworks with standard contractual clauses as fallback, a subprocessor list maintained in the DPA, SOC 2 Type 2 stated, and a privacy policy saying personal data is processed primarily in the European Union. I found no public information on an EU contracting entity or representative or on named EU hosting infrastructure, which caps it for a European buyer. 9 10 11 12
The SaaS Platform Engineer
The contracting entity is Better Stack, Inc., a Delaware corporation under New York governing law, with a published DPA whose transfers to the United States rest on Data Privacy Framework certification and standard contractual clauses; the privacy policy states personal data is processed 'primarily in the European Union'. A subprocessor list is maintained online and SOC 2 Type 2 compliance is stated, but we found no public information naming the hosting infrastructure or an EU contracting entity or representative. For a Berlin SaaS under GDPR this reads as a US vendor with safeguards rather than a documented European chain. 9 10 11 12
The Customer Support Lead
The contracting entity is Better Stack, Inc., a Delaware corporation with New York governing law, so we would not be contracting with a European company. On the plus side, the privacy policy states personal data is processed primarily in the European Union, a data processing agreement is published with standard contractual clauses and Data Privacy Framework certification, subprocessors are listed online, SOC 2 Type 2 compliance is stated, and custom telemetry data residency is offered — though the DPA also permits transfers to the United States. We found no public information on the hosting infrastructure itself or an EU representative. 8 9 10 11 12
The E-Commerce Operations Manager
The contracting entity is Better Stack, Inc., a Delaware corporation under New York law, while the privacy policy states personal data is processed primarily in the European Union, with US transfers covered by Data Privacy Framework certification and standard contractual clauses, a published DPA referencing an online sub-processor list, and SOC 2 Type 2 claimed. The captured pages do not name the hosting infrastructure or sub-processor locations and show no EU entity or representative — a real consideration for our German, Austrian and Swiss business. 9 10 11 12
The Information Security Officer
The contracting entity is Better Stack, Inc., a Delaware corporation governed by New York law, while the privacy policy states personal data is processed primarily in the European Union, with transfers to the United States covered by the Data Privacy Framework and standard contractual clauses; a data processing agreement is published and points to an online subprocessor list, and SOC 2 Type 2 is stated. The captured pages do not show the subprocessor names and locations themselves, and we found no public information on named hosting infrastructure or an EU representative — I would insist on seeing that list before signature. 9 10 11 12
The Skeptic
The contracting entity is Better Stack, Inc., a Delaware corporation under New York law and courts; the privacy policy says personal data is processed 'primarily in the European Union' while the data processing agreement permits transfers to the United States under the Data Privacy Framework and standard contractual clauses. A DPA is published, a subprocessor list is maintained online, and SOC2 Type 2 is stated, but we found no public information on an EU contracting entity or EU representative, and subprocessor locations beyond the United States are not itemised. 9 10 11 12
Pricing transparency
panel disagrees
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether a buyer can compute the real annual cost from public pages alone: price per tier by number of monitors, check interval and status pages, team seats and on-call responders, what SMS and phone alerts cost, which features (multi-step or browser checks, SSO, longer retention, private locations, white-label) cost extra, the free tier and its limits, overage handling, minimum term and VAT.
0 — No public prices at all; every customer is a sales call.
3 — A starting price or a free tier exists, but how cost scales with monitors, intervals, seats or alerts is unclear.
5 — Tiers are public with their monitor count, interval and main inclusions, but at least one commonly needed piece (SMS or call alerts, extra seats, extra status pages, SSO, longer retention) is unpriced or "on request".
8 — Every tier priced publicly with its scaling rule (monitors, interval, seats, responders, status pages), SMS and call costs stated, add-ons priced, overage handling stated, minimum term and VAT treatment stated.
10 — Complete price computability: annual cost derivable for a given number of monitors, interval, team size and alert volume, with every add-on, overage and support fee and the cancellation and data-return terms published.
The Agency Developer
The free tier is precisely documented — $0 per month for 10 monitors and heartbeats, 1 status page, Slack and email alerts — and add-ons carry exact numbers: single sign-on with Azure or Okta at $5 per user per month, Google single sign-on included, transaction checks at $1 per 100 Playwright minutes, and unlimited team members at $0 per member per month. Prices are stated to be exclusive of taxes, invoices fall due within 15 days, and a 60-day money-back guarantee is published. I found no public information on paid tiers with a price per monitor, so the cost of running two hundred monitors is not computable from these pages, and enterprise is a custom quote. 8 9 2
The SaaS Platform Engineer
The free tier is itemised exactly — $0 per month, 10 monitors & heartbeats, 1 status page, Slack & e-mail alerts — and add-ons carry exact public prices: Single Sign-On with Azure or Okta at $5 per user per month, $9 per responder license per month for Slack workflows, 100 Playwright minutes $1, and $0.000050 per exception, with unlimited team members at $0 per member per month and prices stated exclusive of value added tax. We found no public information on how cost scales beyond the free tier with monitor count, check interval or extra status pages, and enterprise is left at 'Reach out for a custom quote'. An annual add-on cost is computable; the core paid uptime plan is not. 2 8 9
The Customer Support Lead
The free tier is fully specified — $0 per month, 10 monitors & heartbeats, 1 status page, Slack & e-mail alerts — and paid items are priced in the open: Single Sign-On with Okta at $5 per user per month, Slack responder licenses at $9 per responder license per month, hosted transaction checks at "100 Playwright minutes $1", plus per-GB log and metric pricing and per-exception and per-replay overages, with the terms stating prices are exclusive of taxes. Alerts including SMS and voice calls fall under their "all-you-can-alert pricing". We found no public information on the paid tier ladder by monitor count, check interval pricing, minimum term or overage caps, and enterprise pricing is a custom quote. 2 8 9
The E-Commerce Operations Manager
The free tier is fully specified at $0 per month with 10 monitors & heartbeats and 1 status page, and unit prices are public for add-ons ($5 per user per month for Okta or Azure single sign-on, $1 per 100 Playwright minutes, $0.000050 per exception, $0.00150 per session replay, plus per-GB log and metric rates), with Google single sign-on included and prices stated as exclusive of taxes. The captured pages show no public ladder for paid uptime tiers by monitor count or interval and enterprise is a custom quote, so I cannot compute our annual cost for forty monitors from them alone. 8 9 2
The Information Security Officer
The free tier is precise ($0 per month, 10 monitors and heartbeats, 1 status page), team members are unlimited at $0 per member per month, and add-ons are individually priced — Single Sign-On with Azure or Okta at $5 per user per month, $9 per responder license per month, 100 Playwright minutes for $1, plus per-GB log and metric rates — with prices stated as exclusive of taxes and invoices due within 15 days. The captured pricing shows no paid uptime tier with its monitor count and interval, SMS and call costs are covered only by the phrase "all-you-can-alert pricing", the enterprise plan is a custom quote, and we found no public information on minimum terms. 2 8 9
The Skeptic
The free tier is fully specified — ten monitors, one status page, 100,000 exceptions — and add-ons carry exact unit prices: Single Sign-On with Okta or Azure at $5 per user per month, Playwright minutes at $1 per 100 minutes, additional exceptions at $0.000050 each, with taxes stated exclusive of VAT. But no paid uptime tier price or monitor-scaling rule appears on the captured pricing page and enterprise is a custom quote, so a real annual cost cannot be computed; 'all-you-can-alert' pricing sits beside terms reserving the right to set quotas, and the captured pages give different pictures of refunds — a 60-day money-back guarantee on the pricing page against terms stating no refund is owed. 2 8 9
European sovereignty — proven facts
1 of 6 dimensions provenBuilt only from facts shown on the vendor's own pages. A dimension we could not prove is left open, not scored as zero.
| Legal entity | Incorporated in US | 0/2 pts | 9 Report an error |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hosting location | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
| Hosting options | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
| Open source | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Data processing agreement | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
| Transfer impact assessment | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
Questions about Better Stack Uptime
Is Better Stack Uptime European?
No. whats-best.ai classifies Better Stack Uptime as Rest of world. Its vendor, Better Stack, Inc., is incorporated in United States, per the vendor’s page captured 1 Nov 2026.
Where does Better Stack Uptime store data?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 1 Nov 2026.
Does Better Stack Uptime have a free plan?
Yes. Better Stack Uptime has a free plan, per the vendor’s page captured 1 Nov 2026.
What are the best alternatives to Better Stack Uptime?
As of 2 Nov 2026, the panel rates Hyperping (3.5/5), Checkly (3.5/5) and openstatus (3.5/5) highest among the other 14 Uptime Monitoring & Status Pages products evaluated. Ratings that look equal are rounded to half stars; the order uses the unrounded rating, then the name. The highest-rated European alternative is Hyperping (EU-Made). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made. The full list, with European products first: Better Stack Uptime alternatives.
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 1 Nov 2026. Vendors change pricing and policies without notice; every fact reflects its source as of the capture date shown in the registry.
- Weak sourcing — Hosting location, Hosting options, Data processing agreement. Not confirmed on the vendor’s own pages as captured.
- AI can misread a source. Extraction and judgement are automated; a citation guarantees traceability, not infallibility. If something here is wrong, say so — no account needed, every report is decided within 5 business days, and accepted corrections are published.
What we left out
A claim that does not survive our checks costs us the claim, not the page. This is what was taken off this one.
- 16 pricing facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 11 compliance facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 10 product facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 4 legal facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 2 hosting facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 1 data fact could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and was left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 1 integrations fact could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and was left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 3 sovereignty dimensions could not be confirmed on the vendor’s own pages and are shown as unknown. Know more? Tell us
Sources (23)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor homepage betterstack.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 2 Features page (uptime monitoring) betterstack.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 3 Features page (status pages) betterstack.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 4 Features page (incident management and on-call) betterstack.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 5 Documentation betterstack.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 6 Documentation (cron and heartbeat monitoring) betterstack.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 7 API documentation betterstack.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 8 Pricing page betterstack.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 9 Terms of service betterstack.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 10 Privacy policy betterstack.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 11 Data processing agreement (dpa) betterstack.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 12 Security / trust page betterstack.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 13 Checks, locations & failure confirmation — found from sitemap betterstack.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 14 Checks, locations & failure confirmation — found from sitemap betterstack.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 15 Alerting, escalation & on-call — found from sitemap betterstack.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 16 Alerting, escalation & on-call — found from sitemap betterstack.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 17 Status pages & incident communication — found from sitemap betterstack.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 18 Status pages & incident communication — found from sitemap betterstack.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 19 API, monitoring as code & team administration — found from sitemap betterstack.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 20 API, monitoring as code & team administration — found from sitemap betterstack.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 21 Uptime reports, data & the vendor's own reliability — found from sitemap betterstack.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 22 Uptime reports, data & the vendor's own reliability — found from sitemap betterstack.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 23 Code repository (open-source licence) — found from the homepage github.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →