whats-best.ai
Search Sign in

Uptime Monitoring & Status Pages

Hyperping

EU-Made Report an error

Panel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars

Category median

Sovereignty: not determined

0–5 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

Hyperping: AI-assisted analysis on whats-best.ai Hyperping: AI-assisted analysis on whats-best.ai (dark)

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

Hyperping alternatives, European ones first →

Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.

The Agency Developer

Weighted verdict

Runs hosting and maintenance at a fifteen-person web agency with sixty client sites on WordPress, TYPO3 and Shopware. Has learned about an expired certificate from a client's angry phone call once and does not want a second time. Wants HTTP, keyword, SSL and domain expiry checks set up in bulk, client groups with their own status pages and monthly uptime reports, and a price per monitor that still works at two hundred monitors.

Same scores as the panel view — this lens weights them the way this judge cares.

Scored by The Agency Developer

Panel median The Agency Developer This judge’s scores over the panel median. Each label opens its reasoning below.
Scores per criterion, in stars out of 5
Criterion Panel median The Agency Developer
Checks, locations & failure confirmation 4 of 5 4 of 5
Alerting, escalation & on-call 3.5 of 5 3.5 of 5
Status pages & incident communication 3.5 of 5 3.5 of 5
API, monitoring as code & team administration 3.5 of 5 3.5 of 5
Uptime reports, data & the vendor's own reliability 3 of 5 3 of 5
European sovereignty 4 of 5 3.5 of 5
Pricing transparency 3.5 of 5 3.5 of 5

Checks, locations & failure confirmation

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.

Report an error

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

Report an error

Alerting, escalation & on-call

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.

Report an error

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

Report an error

Status pages & incident communication

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.

Report an error

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

Report an error

API, monitoring as code & team administration

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.

Report an error

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

Report an error

Uptime reports, data & the vendor's own reliability

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.

Report an error

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

Report an error

European sovereignty

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.

Report an error

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

Report an error

Pricing transparency

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.

Report an error

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

Report an error

European sovereignty — proven facts

0 of 6 dimensions proven

Built only from facts shown on the vendor's own pages. A dimension we could not prove is left open, not scored as zero.

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

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.

Do you know more about Hyperping? Tell us Report an error on this page

Sources (22)

The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.

  1. 1 Vendor homepage hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  2. 2 Features page (SSL monitoring) hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  3. 3 Features page (cron job monitoring) hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  4. 4 Features page (status pages) hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  5. 5 Features page (on-call) hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  6. 6 API documentation hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  7. 7 Pricing page hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  8. 8 Terms of service hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  9. 9 Privacy policy hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  10. 10 Data processing agreement (dpa) hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  11. 11 GDPR and EU data page hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  12. 12 Security / trust page hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  13. 13 Checks, locations & failure confirmation — found from sitemap hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  14. 14 Checks, locations & failure confirmation — found from sitemap hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  15. 15 Alerting, escalation & on-call — found from sitemap hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  16. 16 Alerting, escalation & on-call — found from sitemap hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  17. 17 Status pages & incident communication — found from sitemap hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  18. 18 Status pages & incident communication — found from sitemap hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  19. 19 API, monitoring as code & team administration — found from sitemap hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  20. 20 API, monitoring as code & team administration — found from sitemap hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  21. 21 Uptime reports, data & the vendor's own reliability — found from sitemap hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  22. 22 Uptime reports, data & the vendor's own reliability — found from sitemap hyperping.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →