whats-best.ai
Search Sign in

Uptime Monitoring & Status Pages

Phare Uptime

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 Lightkeeper OÜ · phare.io

Report an error on this page Is this your product? →

Link to this page

Phare Uptime: AI-assisted analysis on whats-best.ai Phare Uptime: 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.

Phare Uptime at a glance

Vendor
Lightkeeper OÜ
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
Starting price
“No artificial feature gating, starting at 5€ per month.” (vendor’s words) source, captured 1 Nov 2026
Panel verdict
The AI panel rates Phare Uptime 3/5, the mean of 6 judges. Phare Uptime, an uptime monitoring and status-page service from Lightkeeper OÜ in Estonia, scores highest on pricing transparency — five of six judges gave 8 — on published tiers (Hobby free forever, Scale at 5€ /mo plus usage), published per-unit overages and unlimited team members and projects. how scores are made
As of
Vendor pages captured 1 Nov 2026; evaluated by the panel 2 Nov 2026. all sources

Phare Uptime alternatives, European ones first →

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

The Customer Support Lead

Weighted verdict

Leads a support team of nine at a software company whose customers are tax advisers and payroll offices. During the last outage the team answered three hundred tickets that all asked the same question. Wants a status page on the company's own domain with components customers recognise, incident templates, subscribers notified by email, a private page for the largest accounts, and an uptime history they can point to in a contract renewal.

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

Scored by The Customer Support Lead

Panel median The Customer Support Lead 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 Customer Support Lead
Checks, locations & failure confirmation 3.5 of 5 3.5 of 5
Alerting, escalation & on-call 3.5 of 5 3 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 4 of 5
Pricing transparency 4 of 5 4 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 Customer Support Lead

HTTP(S), TCP and ping checks run as fast as every 30 seconds from twelve named regions, with documented confirmation logic: a configurable number of failing regions or consecutive failures must occur before an incident is created. Assertions on status code, response headers and body, custom headers and request bodies, SSL certificate discovery with expiry alerts, maintenance windows and a private monitoring agent are all documented. We found no public information on browser or multi-step user-journey checks, or on DNS record and domain-expiry monitoring. 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 Customer Support Lead

Alerts go out by email, SMS, voice, Slack, Discord, Telegram, Pushover, ilert and outgoing webhook, with rate limits, quiet hours, recovery notices, smart merging of related failures, delivery retries across three email providers, and notification logs showing whether each message arrived; the Scale plan includes 20 SMS/voice alerts with additional ones billed at.1€ per unit. We found no public information on escalation policies with timeouts, on-call rotations and overrides, or acknowledging an incident from the app or chat, which my nine-person team would still need a separate arrangement for. 4 8 15 16 18

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 Customer Support Lead

Branded status pages on our own domain with SSL, monitors grouped into collapsible groups showing aggregated status, unmonitored components displayed by hand, a per-day availability history with an overall percentage over a 30, 60 or 90 day window, incident updates in four states published automatically, scheduled maintenance broadcast to the page, and private pages behind a password, token or IP allowlist for our largest accounts, with unlimited subscribers at no extra cost via RSS, Atom and Slack. We found no public information on email subscribers to status pages or saved incident templates, which matters after three hundred identical tickets. 5 6 8 17 18

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 Customer Support Lead

A documented REST API covers monitors, incidents, maintenance windows, status pages and reports, with bearer-token keys scoped to a project or the whole organisation at read-only or read-write level, and a first-party open-source Terraform provider manages projects, monitors, status pages and alert rules as code, with Ansible and NixOS also listed. Unlimited team members and projects, two-factor login and single sign-on via Okta, Entra ID or Google Workspace are documented. We found no public information on SCIM provisioning, audit logs, client sub-accounts or white-label reports. 1 8 19 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 Customer Support Lead

Uptime statistics per monitor and per project — availability, downtime seconds, MTTR, MTBF and highest incident impact — come back from the API for windows up to a year, with P75/P90/P99 response-time trends, SLA reporting sliced by region, planned maintenance and individual incidents excludable from downtime, and uptime data kept for one year. A service status link appears in their navigation, but we found no public information on the vendor's own status history, an SLA with credits, or scheduled email reports. The pages state that fixed probe IP addresses cannot be provided because checks come from shared ranges, though the monitoring user agent is published. 3 7 9 13 21 22

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 Customer Support Lead

The contracting entity is Lightkeeper OÜ in Estonia under Estonian law with the courts of Tallinn; the platform runs on Hetzner in Germany with encrypted backups at Scaleway in France, and the published sub-processor list names each provider with its location and certifications — email via Brevo, Lettermint and Scaleway, SMS and voice via Infobip (UK company, global data location), analytics via Vemetric, error tracking via Sentry (US company, data in Germany), payments via Paddle. A data processing agreement with standard contractual clauses incorporated by reference and 30 days' notice on sub-processor changes is published. The global data location of the SMS and voice gateway is a stated weak link in the chain, and we found no public information on a certification for Phare itself. 1 9 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 Customer Support Lead

Both public plans are priced plainly — Hobby free forever with 100,000 events and no credit card, and Scale at 5€ per month with 500,000 events, 20 SMS/voice alerts, unlimited private status pages and single sign-on — and the metered model is explained down to the arithmetic: roughly 90,000 events if two regions check every minute, with additional usage at.00001€ per event,.1€ per unit for alerts and.01€ per unit for AI generations, a 10% overage buffer with notice before monitoring pauses, monthly cycles and cancellation at any time. We found no public information on VAT treatment, and the Custom plan is quoted on requirements rather than priced. 2 8 9

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 Phare Uptime

Is Phare Uptime European?

Yes. whats-best.ai classifies Phare Uptime as EU-Made.

Where does Phare Uptime store data?

Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 1 Nov 2026.

Does Phare Uptime have a free plan?

Yes. Phare Uptime has a free plan, per the vendor’s page captured 1 Nov 2026.

What are the best alternatives to Phare 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: Phare Uptime 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 Phare Uptime? Tell us Report an error on this page

Sources (23)

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

  1. 1 Vendor homepage phare.io Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  2. 2 Features page (uptime) phare.io Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  3. 3 Features page (website monitoring) phare.io Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  4. 4 Features page (alerting) phare.io Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  5. 5 Features page (incident management) phare.io Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  6. 6 Features page (status pages) phare.io Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  7. 7 Documentation docs.phare.io Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  8. 8 Pricing page phare.io Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  9. 9 Terms of service (names the operating company) phare.io Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  10. 10 Privacy policy phare.io Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  11. 11 Data processing agreement (dpa) phare.io Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  12. 12 Subprocessor list phare.io Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  13. 13 Checks, locations & failure confirmation — found from sitemap docs.phare.io Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  14. 14 Checks, locations & failure confirmation — found from sitemap docs.phare.io Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  15. 15 Alerting, escalation & on-call — found from sitemap docs.phare.io Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  16. 16 Alerting, escalation & on-call — found from sitemap docs.phare.io Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  17. 17 Status pages & incident communication — found from sitemap docs.phare.io Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  18. 18 Status pages & incident communication — found from sitemap docs.phare.io Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  19. 19 API, monitoring as code & team administration — found from sitemap docs.phare.io Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  20. 20 API, monitoring as code & team administration — found from sitemap docs.phare.io Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  21. 21 Uptime reports, data & the vendor's own reliability — found from sitemap docs.phare.io Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  22. 22 Uptime reports, data & the vendor's own reliability — found from sitemap docs.phare.io Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
  23. 23 Code repository (open-source licence) — found from the homepage github.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →