Uptime Monitoring & Status Pages
Hyperping
EU-Made Report an error0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by Hyperping SAS · hyperping.com
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.
Hyperping at a glance
- Vendor
- Hyperping SAS
- Headquarters
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 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 Hyperping 3.5/5, the mean of 6 judges. Hyperping, the French uptime monitoring and status page service of Hyperping SAS in Paris, scored 7-8 on checks and locations, its strongest area: HTTP checks with keyword assertions, TCP, ping, DNS, SSL and domain-expiry checks, cron heartbeats and Playwright browser checks run from 18 regions as often as every 10 seconds, each failure confirmed from at least two other regions first. 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
Hyperping, the French uptime monitoring and status page service of Hyperping SAS in Paris, scored 7-8 on checks and locations, its strongest area: HTTP checks with keyword assertions, TCP, ping, DNS, SSL and domain-expiry checks, cron heartbeats and Playwright browser checks run from 18 regions as often as every 10 seconds, each failure confirmed from at least two other regions first. Status pages and sovereignty follow: pages are hosted on Vercel, separate from the Frankfurt platform, and the chain is documented down to a public subprocessor list naming US processors, while Hyperping itself holds no SOC 2 or ISO 27001. Reports and reliability is weakest at 5-6 — the lone 5, from the customer support lead, cites metric history of only 2 to 30 days by plan — and judges found no public information on a Hyperping status page, probe IP addresses or SLA credits. Alerting and on-call, automation and teams, and pricing transparency all sit at 7. No criterion split by more than one point.
Speaks for it
- Every alert is double-checked from at least two other regions before it reaches your team, with the confirmation logic documented.
- Checks span HTTP with exact keyword assertions, TCP, ping, DNS, SSL and domain expiry, cron heartbeats and Playwright browser checks, from 18 regions at intervals down to 10 seconds.
- Status pages are hosted on Vercel, separately from the Frankfurt monitoring platform, so the page can outlive a platform outage.
- A public, versioned subprocessor list names each processor with its location, backed by a data processing agreement available to all customers.
- Monitors, status pages and maintenance windows are manageable through a documented REST API and an open-source Terraform provider with import support.
Held against it
- Hyperping states it holds no independent SOC 2 or ISO 27001, with its infrastructure providers carrying those certifications.
- SMS arrives as plan credits of 20, 75 or 200, and judges found no public per-message or per-call price beyond the credits.
- The captured pages give different figures for the Business plan — €299 /month on one, $299 /month and $249 billed yearly on others.
- Judges found no public information on a Hyperping status page or incident history, probe IP addresses for allow-listing, or SLA credits.
- The alert, analytics and billing chain runs through named US providers including Twilio, SendGrid, Stripe, Sentry and Segment.
Best for
- You run checkout flows or JavaScript-heavy pages and want browser checks with multi-region confirmation before anyone is paged.
- You manage a fleet of monitors or many client sites and want monitoring as code, with every change reviewed in a pull request.
- You are a European buyer who wants a French contracting entity, primary storage in Frankfurt and a public subprocessor list, and can accept named US providers in the alert path.
- You publish status pages for customers and want them hosted on infrastructure separate from the monitoring platform.
Avoid if
- You require a vendor that holds its own SOC 2 or ISO 27001 certification — Hyperping states it holds none itself.
- You need per-component uptime percentages, response-time charts or 90-day history bars on status pages — the component documentation states components carry none.
- Your compliance regime cannot tolerate US subprocessors in the alert path — SMS and phone calls run through Twilio and email through SendGrid, both listed as US processors.
- You need EU-only probes and infrastructure as a published, self-serve edition — they are offered on request rather than as a documented plan.
The scores
| Criterion | Panel median |
|---|---|
| Checks, locations & failure confirmation | 4 of 5 |
| Alerting, escalation & on-call | 3.5 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 | 4 of 5 |
| Pricing transparency | 3.5 of 5 |
Checks, locations & failure confirmation
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
Every check my sixty client sites need is documented: HTTP with exact keyword body assertions, TCP port, ping, DNS, SSL certificate expiry with OCSP and CRL revocation checking, domain expiry read from the registry over RDAP, cron heartbeats, and Playwright browser checks, at intervals down to 10 seconds from 18 regions. A failure is retried from at least two other regions before alerting, keyword misses are double-checked from other selected regions, and the actual failed response is kept in the monitor's logs, so I can see why an SSL or domain alert fired. We found no public information on multi-step API checks with assertions on headers and body, or on probe locations named by city. 1 2 3 13 14
The SaaS Platform Engineer
Every check type I run is there — HTTP with keyword assertions on the raw body, TCP, ping, DNS, domain expiry over RDAP, SSL with revocation and chain checks, cron heartbeats with grace periods, and Playwright browser checks — from 18 regions at intervals down to 10 seconds, with failed checks retried from additional regions and every alert double-checked from at least two other locations before anyone is paged. What keeps it below the top for me: probes are counted by region rather than listed by city, and I found no public information on multi-step API checks that assert on headers as well as the body. 1 2 3 13 14
The Customer Support Lead
Every check type my teams watch is documented — HTTP and API with keyword body assertions, TCP, ping, DNS, domain expiry read from the registry, SSL with revocation checks, cron heartbeats and Playwright browser checks — from 18 regions at intervals down to 10 seconds, with failures re-verified from other regions and a published recipe of timeouts, consecutive failures and response-time thresholds. We found no public information on multi-step API checks asserting on headers, probe locations listed by city, or published probe health. 1 14 13 2
The E-Commerce Operations Manager
Every check type my shop needs is documented — HTTP, keyword assertions on the response body, TCP, ping, DNS, SSL and domain expiry — plus Playwright browser checks for the checkout flow, with checks as fast as every 10 to 30 seconds from eighteen regions and each failure re-verified from other regions, optionally requiring two or three consecutive failures before anyone is paged. Server agents cover internal machines and maintenance windows can be scheduled. We found no public information on multi-step API checks or a city-by-city probe list, which is what keeps this just below the top level. 1 2 7 13 14
The Information Security Officer
Every check type my auditors ask about is documented: HTTP, keyword with a published double-check from other regions, TCP, ping, DNS, domain and SSL expiry read over RDAP, cron with timezone handling, and Playwright browser checks, at 10 to 30 second intervals from 18 regions, with a failure confirmed by at least two other locations before anyone is paged. Locations are given as a count rather than a named city list, and we found no public information on multi-step API checks with header assertions or published probe health, which holds this just below the top level. 1 2 3 13 14
The Skeptic
HTTP with exact keyword assertions, TCP port, ping, DNS, SSL and domain-expiry checks read over RDAP, cron and heartbeat monitoring and Playwright browser checks run as often as every 10 seconds from 18 regions, and every alert is double-checked from at least two other regions first — the confirmation logic is documented, not just claimed. Two things hold it back: the probe locations are counted, never named by city, and I found no public information on multi-step API checks with assertions on headers or on maintenance windows pausing checks. 1 2 3 13 14
Alerting, escalation & on-call
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
Alerts go to Slack, Microsoft Teams, Google Chat, PagerDuty, Opsgenie, Jira Service Management, Discord, Telegram, a mobile app, email, SMS, phone calls and webhooks, and the on-call side is genuinely built out: rotations with their own timezones, concurrent shifts, time restrictions, shift reassignment, escalation policies that resolve the schedule at alert time, and grouped alerts so one incident pages once. SMS arrives as plan credits of 20, 75 and 200 by tier, and PagerDuty and Opsgenie alerts close themselves on recovery. We found no public information on acknowledging and resolving from the app or chat, on incident timelines showing who did what, or on a per-country price for SMS and phone calls. 1 3 7 16
The SaaS Platform Engineer
Escalation steps can hand an unacknowledged alert to whoever is on call by email, SMS or phone call, with multi-timezone rotations, concurrent shifts, shift reassignment and grouped alerts so one incident pages once — that is real on-call, not just notifications. Recovery goes out on the same channels and PagerDuty or Opsgenie incidents close themselves. I found no public information on acknowledging from the app or chat, incident timelines showing who did what, or per-country call pricing, and SMS arrives as monthly credits that scale with the plan rather than a per-message price. 1 3 7 8 16
The Customer Support Lead
Phone calls, SMS, email, Slack, Microsoft Teams, Google Chat, Discord, Telegram, webhooks, PagerDuty, Opsgenie and Jira are all documented alert routes, and the on-call piece is real: schedules with multiple rotations in their own timezones, concurrent shifts, shift reassignment, escalation policies that resolve the schedule at alert time, recovery notices and grouped alerts so one incident pages once. We found no public information on acknowledging and resolving from the app or chat, incident timelines, or per-country call pricing; SMS arrives as plan credits of 20 to 200 rather than a stated per-message price. 16 1 7 3
The E-Commerce Operations Manager
Email, SMS and real phone calls can be routed to whoever the on-call schedule has on duty that night, with rotations in their own timezones, shift reassignment, escalation steps, grouped alerts so one incident pages once, and recovery notices; PagerDuty and Opsgenie are supported and close themselves. Plans state their included SMS credits (20, 75 or 200). We found no public information on escalation timeouts, acknowledging an incident from the app, incident timelines, or the per-message cost once SMS credits are used up. 1 3 7 8 16
The Information Security Officer
Alerts reach email, SMS, phone calls, a mobile app and every chat tool we run, forward to PagerDuty and Opsgenie with automatic close, and on-call schedules support multiple rotations with their own time zones, shift reassignment and concurrent shifts, tied to escalation policies with grouped alerts to cut noise. We found no public information on escalation step timeouts, incident timelines showing who did what, or per-country SMS and call costs — SMS arrives as plan credits of 20 to 200, and status-page subscriber SMS runs through the customer's own Twilio account. 1 3 4 7 8 16
The Skeptic
Alerts reach email, SMS, phone calls, a mobile app, Slack, Microsoft Teams, PagerDuty, Opsgenie and webhooks, backed by on-call schedules with multi-timezone rotations, shift overrides, escalation policies that resolve the schedule at alert time, and grouped alerts that turn one incident into one page. The fine print I always read is thinner: SMS arrives as a monthly credit bundle (20 to 200 by plan) with no per-message price, what happens when credits run out and what calls cost is not stated, and acknowledging or resolving an alert from the app is not described. 1 7 16
Status pages & incident communication
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
The client-group model I run is directly supported: one component can sit on several status pages, a confirmed outage updates the right component automatically, subscribers follow specific services by email, Slack, Teams, SMS, RSS and Atom, and private pages for selected customers come with password, SAML SSO or email sign-in codes. Pages are multilingual, custom domains get automatic HTTPS on paid plans, Business adds white labeling, and customer status pages are hosted on separate infrastructure from the monitoring platform. The captured pages give different figures for per-component history — the features page lists uptime history on pages while the components documentation states components carry no uptime percentage or response-time chart — and we found no public information on incident templates or embeddable widgets. 4 7 9 17
The SaaS Platform Engineer
Confirmed outages update the right component automatically and can notify subscribers, which is exactly the 3 a.m. behaviour I want, on a custom domain with automatic HTTPS, component groups, private pages behind password, SAML or email codes, multilingual pages on Pro, and per-service subscriptions across email, Slack, Teams, SMS and RSS. Customer status pages are hosted on Vercel, separate from the Frankfurt infrastructure, so a platform outage does not take the page with it. The components documentation states components carry no uptime percentage or response-time chart of their own, and I found no public information on incident templates or embeddable widgets. 1 4 7 10 17
The Customer Support Lead
This is close to the page I want at renewal time: our own domain with automatic HTTPS, components and groups that confirmed outages update automatically, email, Slack, Teams, SMS and RSS subscribers who can follow specific services, private pages behind a password, SAML single sign-on or email codes for the largest accounts, four languages, white labeling, and status pages hosted on Vercel separately from the Frankfurt monitoring platform. The component documentation itself states components carry no uptime percentage, response-time chart or 90-day history bar — history sits at page level — and we found no public information on incident templates, which is what my nine people need to answer three hundred identical tickets with one consistent story. 4 1 17 10
The E-Commerce Operations Manager
Public status pages on our own domain with automatic HTTPS, components and groups that update automatically when a monitor fails, subscriber updates by email, Slack, Teams, SMS and RSS, ninety days of uptime history, multilingual pages, white labelling and private pages behind a password, SAML or email codes cover what my German, Austrian and Swiss customers need to see. Status pages are hosted on Vercel, separately from the main platform in Frankfurt, which the subprocessor list documents. We found no public information on incident templates or embeddable widgets, and the component documentation states components show no uptime percentage or history bar of their own. 1 4 7 9 17
The Information Security Officer
Public pages run on a custom domain with automatic HTTPS, removable branding, component groups, 90-day uptime history, automatic incident reporting from confirmed outages, and subscribers by email, SMS, RSS and Atom with per-service follow; private pages take a password, SAML single sign-on or email codes, in four languages. We found no public information on incident templates, embeddable widgets or IP restriction, and components carry no per-component uptime percentage — though page-level history is shown and the status pages are documented as hosted separately on Vercel while the platform runs in Frankfurt. 1 4 7 10 17
The Skeptic
Public pages on your own domain with automatic HTTPS, components and groups that confirmed outages update automatically, private pages behind password, SAML or email codes, several languages, and subscribers by email, Slack, Teams, SMS (through your own Twilio) and RSS who can follow specific services — and the pages are hosted on Vercel, separately from the Frankfurt infrastructure, so the page can outlive the platform it reports on. One caution: the captured pages give different figures for per-component metrics — a features page lists uptime history while the components documentation says components carry no uptime percentage, response-time chart or 90-day history bar — and I found no public information on incident templates or embeddable widgets. 1 4 10 17
API, monitoring as code & team administration
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
Monitors, status pages, incidents, maintenance windows, outages and reports are all reachable through a documented REST API with per-key read-and-write permissions, an open-source Terraform provider with import support for existing setups, and an MCP server, so a fleet of two hundred monitors goes in as code and every change is reviewed in a pull request. SAML SSO is native from the Pro plan, multi-factor authentication is required, access roles exist, and the documentation set includes a page on project audit logs. We found no public information on SCIM provisioning or on client sub-accounts where each customer logs in separately. 4 6 7 10 12 20
The SaaS Platform Engineer
Monitors, status pages and maintenance windows can live in Terraform through an open-source provider with import support, the API covers monitors, outages, incidents, subscribers, reports and healthchecks with per-key read-only or read-write permissions, and SAML single sign-on is native from the Pro plan. The provider is community-maintained by Develeap rather than first-party, which matters when a four-person rotation bets its checks on it. I found no public information on SCIM provisioning, per-client sub-accounts or bulk monitor import; migration tooling appears as status-page and subscriber import from Atlassian Statuspage or Instatus. 2 4 6 7 12
The Customer Support Lead
Monitors, status pages, incidents, maintenance windows, outages, reports and subscribers are all reachable through a documented REST API with per-key read and read-write permissions, an open-source Terraform provider lets every change be reviewed in a pull request, incidents can be opened from CI or deploy scripts, and SAML single sign-on is native from the Pro plan. We found no public information on SCIM provisioning, audit logs, customer-side two-factor authentication, or separate client sub-accounts with their own logins. 6 7 4 12
The E-Commerce Operations Manager
Monitors, status pages, incidents and maintenance windows are all manageable through a documented REST API and an open-source Terraform provider with import support, so the agency can review every monitoring change in a pull request, and SAML single sign-on starts on the Pro plan with access roles and SSO mentioned among the security features. We found no public information on SCIM provisioning, client sub-accounts with their own logins, or bulk import of monitors, which is what an agency set-up would want. 4 6 7 10 12
The Information Security Officer
The REST API covers monitors, status pages, incidents, maintenance, outages and reports with per-key read/write permissions, and an open-source Terraform provider manages monitors, pages and maintenance windows as code, with changes reviewed in a pull request. Single sign-on is native SAML from the Pro plan with WorkOS for other providers higher up, role-based access and multi-factor authentication are stated, and the documentation includes a dedicated audit-logs page; we found no public information on SCIM provisioning or client sub-accounts with their own logins. 4 6 7 10 12 20
The Skeptic
Monitors, status pages, subscribers, incidents, outages, maintenance windows, healthchecks and reports are all reachable through a documented REST API with per-key read-only or read-write permissions, and an open-source Terraform provider manages monitors, pages and maintenance windows as code with import support and changes reviewed in a pull request; SAML single sign-on is native from the Pro plan. I found no public information on SCIM provisioning, client sub-accounts with their own logins, or audit-log export — and multi-factor authentication is documented for Hyperping's own administrators, not stated for customer logins. 4 6 7 12
Uptime reports, data & the vendor's own reliability
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
Uptime is computed from outages over a default 30-day window, exports to CSV and is available through a reports API, a weekly report includes healthchecks alongside monitors, uptime data is kept for two years, and paid plans carry a 99.9% monthly uptime commitment with its exclusions listed. The captured pages give different figures for how far back results go — plan comparisons show 2 to 30 days of metric history against the two-year uptime retention. We found no public information on monthly scheduled or client-branded reports, response-time percentiles, published probe IP addresses, or the vendor's own public status page with incident history. 1 3 6 7 8 9
The SaaS Platform Engineer
Uptime is computed from outages over 30 days by default, exported to CSV, reachable through the reports API and delivered in a weekly report, with uptime data retained for two years and a published 99.9% monthly uptime commitment on paid plans alongside a stated 99.99% platform figure. I found no public information on response-time percentiles or DNS/TLS/TTFB breakdowns, probe IP addresses for allow-listing, SLA credits, or Hyperping's own public status page and incident history — that last gap is the one I'd probe hardest before trusting the monitor itself. 1 3 6 8 9
The Customer Support Lead
Uptime data and logs are retained two years for historical reporting, uptime is computed from outages over 30 days by default, exported to CSV and included in a weekly report, the API exposes uptime and performance reports, and a 99.9% monthly uptime commitment is published for paid plans. We found no public information on published probe IP addresses for allow-listing (my tax-office customers lock their networks down), response-time percentiles, SLA credits, or the vendor's own public status page and incident history — and dashboards keep metric history for only 2 to 30 days by plan. 9 3 8 7
The E-Commerce Operations Manager
Weekly reports, CSV export and a reports API give me the downtime record to show the agency, uptime data and logs are retained for two years, and the terms publish a 99.9 percent monthly uptime commitment for paid plans along with its exclusions. We found no public information on response-time percentiles, SLA credits, published probe IP addresses for allow-listing, or a public status page with incident history for Hyperping itself. 1 3 6 8 9
The Information Security Officer
Uptime is computed from recorded outages over 30 days by default with CSV export and a weekly report, uptime data and logs are kept two years for historical reporting, export runs through the API or support with a 30-day window after termination, and a 99.9 percent monthly uptime commitment is published for paid plans together with its exclusions. We found no public information on the vendor's own public status page or incident history, SLA credits, response-time percentiles, or the probe IP addresses an allow-list would need. 1 3 6 8 9
The Skeptic
Uptime is computed from outage records over a stated default window, exported to CSV or pulled through a reports API, delivered in weekly email reports, and the privacy policy commits to two years of uptime and log retention — the history answer I ask every vendor for. The monitor's own house is the weak side: the homepage advertises 99.99% platform uptime while the terms commit to 99.9% monthly with exclusions and no credits, and I found no public information on a Hyperping status page or incident history, probe IP addresses for allow-listing, or response-time percentiles. 1 3 8 9
European sovereignty
panel opinion
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 entity is Hyperping SAS of Paris under French law with disputes before the Paris courts, primary customer data sits in DigitalOcean's Frankfurt data center, and a public, versioned subprocessor list with locations and 14-day change notice backs a data processing agreement offered to all customers, with Standard Contractual Clauses and the EU-US Data Privacy Framework covering transfers. SMS, email, error tracking, analytics, SSO and payment run through US providers such as Twilio, SendGrid, Sentry, Segment and Stripe, and Hyperping states it holds no SOC 2 or ISO 27001 certification itself while its infrastructure providers do. EU-only probe and infrastructure setups are offered on request. 9 10 11 12
The SaaS Platform Engineer
The contracting entity is Hyperping SAS in Paris under French law with disputes in Paris courts, primary hosting is named as DigitalOcean Frankfurt with Scaleway for EU probes, subprocessors are published with their locations, a DPA is offered to all customers with Standard Contractual Clauses for transfers, and EU-only probe and infrastructure setups are delivered on request. But the alerting chain itself — Twilio for SMS and calls, SendGrid for email, plus Stripe, Sentry and Segment — runs through US providers with contractual safeguards rather than European gateways, and Hyperping itself states it holds no SOC 2 or ISO 27001, only that its infrastructure providers maintain such certifications. 9 10 11 12
The Customer Support Lead
The contracting entity is Hyperping SAS in Paris under French law with the CNIL as its supervisory authority, primary customer data sits in DigitalOcean's Frankfurt data centre, a data processing agreement is available to all customers, the sub-processor list is public with each provider's location, transfers outside the EEA carry Standard Contractual Clauses, and EU-only probe and infrastructure setups are offered on request. The alert and billing chain still runs through US providers — Twilio for SMS and calls, SendGrid for email, Stripe for payment, Sentry and Segment — and Hyperping itself states it holds no SOC 2 or ISO 27001, its infrastructure providers carrying those certifications instead. 11 10 12 9
The E-Commerce Operations Manager
The contracting party is Hyperping SAS in Paris under French law with the CNIL as supervisory authority, all primary customer data sits in DigitalOcean's Frankfurt data centre with EU probes on Scaleway, a data processing agreement is published with a public subprocessor list giving each processor's location, transfers out of the EEA rely on standard contractual clauses, and EU-only probe and infrastructure setups are offered. The security page states Hyperping itself holds no independent SOC 2 or ISO 27001 while its infrastructure providers do, and the alert path runs through Twilio and SendGrid in the US with status pages on Vercel. For my German, Austrian and Swiss shop this is a transparent European chain with named non-European gateways rather than a sovereign end to end. 9 10 11 12
The Information Security Officer
The contracting entity is Hyperping SAS of Paris under French law with disputes in the Paris courts, all primary customer data sits in DigitalOcean's Frankfurt data centre, a public versioned subprocessor list names every processor with its location, and a data processing agreement covering EU GDPR is published with standard contractual clauses, 72-hour breach notification and 14-day notice of subprocessor changes. For a NIS2-regulated buyer the open items are real: the alert path runs through US processors — Twilio handles the on-call phone numbers, SendGrid the subscriber email, WorkOS the single sign-on, Vercel the status pages — and Hyperping itself holds no ISO 27001 or SOC 2 certification, only its infrastructure providers, though EU-only probe and infrastructure setups are offered on request. 9 10 11 12 14
The Skeptic
The chain is documented rather than implied: Hyperping SAS contracts from Paris under French law, all primary customer data sits on named EU infrastructure in DigitalOcean's Frankfurt data center, a published DPA covers EU, UK, Swiss and California law with Standard Contractual Clauses for transfers, and a public subprocessor list names Twilio, SendGrid, Stripe, Sentry, Segment, Google and WorkOS as US processors with 14 days' notice of changes. What keeps it off the top: Hyperping itself holds no SOC 2 or ISO 27001 — the stated certifications belong to its infrastructure providers — and EU-only probes and infrastructure are offered only as a conversation rather than a documented edition. 9 10 11 12
Pricing transparency
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
Tiers are published with monitor counts of 50, 250 and 1,000, check intervals of 30 seconds (20 on Business), seats and per-seat add-on prices, status pages, browser checks, server agents and SMS credits, so what two hundred monitors cost is readable straight off the pricing page. Extra seats, additional server agents and status-page SAML connections are priced, VAT is stated as excluded, annual billing gives two months free, and annual cancellations within 14 days are refunded. The captured pages state Business pricing as "€299 /month", "$299 /month" and "$249 billed yearly", and we found no public information on the per-message price of SMS and phone calls beyond plan credits, on metered-billing overage rates, or on the Enterprise tier. 1 2 4 7 8
The SaaS Platform Engineer
Tiers, monitor counts, check intervals, seats with per-seat prices, subscriber limits and add-ons for SAML (stated as $49/month for Microsoft Entra ID or $99/month for other providers), server agents and logs are public, with VAT-exclusive pricing, a 30-day price-change notice and a 14-day annual refund window stated. The captured pages give different figures for the Business plan — "€299 /month" on the status-page pricing and "$299 /month" on the homepage — and I found no public information on per-message SMS or per-country phone-call costs beyond the monthly credits included per plan, or on the price of extra status pages. 1 4 7 8
The Customer Support Lead
Tiers are public with monitor counts, check intervals, seats and per-seat overages, status pages, subscribers, browser checks, server agents and on-call schedules, add-ons carry prices (status-page SAML at $49 or $99 a month by provider, extra server agents, logs by gigabyte), VAT is excluded, annual billing takes two months free with a 14-day refund window, and a free tier of 20 monitors needs no card. The captured pages quote the same plans in both euros and dollars, SMS is granted as credits of 20 to 200 with no per-message or per-call price, and we found no public information on overage handling beyond seats. 4 7 8 11
The E-Commerce Operations Manager
Each self-serve tier is public with monitor count, check interval, seats and their per-seat price, status pages, subscriber limits, included SMS credits, server agents and log volume, SAML add-ons at 49 or 99 dollars a month, extra agents at 1.50 to 2 euros, a 20-monitor free tier, VAT-exclusive pricing, a 14-day annual refund and a no-card trial, so I can cost the Business plan for my shop almost fully. The captured pages state plan prices in euros on the pricing page and in US dollars elsewhere, so I would confirm the currency at purchase. We found no public information on the per-message cost of SMS or calls beyond the included credits, on extra browser checks, or on overage charges once metered log billing starts. 1 4 7 8
The Information Security Officer
Every self-serve tier is public with its scaling rule — Free with 20 monitors, Essentials at €29 a month with 50 monitors, 3 seats at +€7 each and one page, Pro at €89 with 250 monitors and 10 seats at +€9, Business at €299 with 1,000 monitors, 20 seats at +€12, 10 pages and 20-second checks — plus per-plan SMS credits, server agents, browser checks and log volumes, priced add-ons such as status-page single sign-on at $49 to $99 a month, VAT treatment, the refund window and the price-change notice. The captured pages give different currencies for plan prices — euros on the pricing and GDPR pages, dollars on the homepage and in the terms — and we found no public information on Enterprise pricing, per-country SMS or call costs beyond the included credits, or overage handling once limits are passed. 1 4 7 8 11
The Skeptic
The tiers publish their scaling rules in unusual detail: monitors, check interval, seats with per-seat prices, status pages, on-call schedules, browser checks, server agents, SMS credits and log gigabytes per plan, with add-ons priced (status-page SAML at $49/month for Microsoft Entra ID or $99/month for other providers, extra agents at €2/mo), VAT treatment, the 14-day annual refund window and two months free on yearly billing all stated. A buyer still cannot compute SMS or phone-call costs once credits run out, overage handling, a minimum term or the Enterprise tier — and the captured pages give different figures for the Business plan, €299 /month on one and $299 /month with $249 billed yearly on others. 1 2 4 7 8
European sovereignty — proven facts
0 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 | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited 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 Hyperping
Is Hyperping European?
Yes. whats-best.ai classifies Hyperping as EU-Made.
Where does Hyperping store data?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 1 Nov 2026.
Does Hyperping have a free plan?
Yes. Hyperping has a free plan, per the vendor’s page captured 1 Nov 2026.
What are the best alternatives to Hyperping?
As of 2 Nov 2026, the panel rates Checkly (3.5/5), openstatus (3.5/5) and Oh Dear (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 openstatus (EU-Made). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made. The full list, with European products first: Hyperping 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, Legal entity, 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.
- 13 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
- 8 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
- 3 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
- 2 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
- 4 sovereignty dimensions could not be confirmed on the vendor’s own pages and are shown as unknown. Know more? Tell us
Sources (22)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor homepage hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 2 Features page (SSL monitoring) hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 3 Features page (cron job monitoring) hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 4 Features page (status pages) hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 5 Features page (on-call) hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 6 API documentation hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 7 Pricing page hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 8 Terms of service hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 9 Privacy policy hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 10 Data processing agreement (dpa) hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 11 GDPR and EU data page hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 12 Security / trust page hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 13 Checks, locations & failure confirmation — found from sitemap hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 14 Checks, locations & failure confirmation — found from sitemap hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 15 Alerting, escalation & on-call — found from sitemap hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 16 Alerting, escalation & on-call — found from sitemap hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 17 Status pages & incident communication — found from sitemap hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 18 Status pages & incident communication — found from sitemap hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 19 API, monitoring as code & team administration — found from sitemap hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 20 API, monitoring as code & team administration — found from sitemap hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 21 Uptime reports, data & the vendor's own reliability — found from sitemap hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 22 Uptime reports, data & the vendor's own reliability — found from sitemap hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →