Compare · third-party
Status.io vs Statuspage
Status.io and Atlassian's Statuspage are the two long-established hosted status-page products, and teams shopping for incident communication often end up deciding between exactly these two. Both are communication layers rather than monitors: each takes its component states from operators, integrations, or an API rather than from checks of its own. This page compares them directly on pricing, free tiers, subscriber and seat limits, and how automated updates get in, each claim sourced to the vendor's own pricing or documentation pages and dated.
Free tier
Don’t have
no free plan on its published pricing; plans start at $79/mo (Basic)
Have
up to 2 public pages, 25 components, 100 subscribers, per Atlassian's docs
Entry paid price
Have
$79/mo Basic: 500 subscribers, 5 team members, 5 metrics
Have
$29/mo Hobby: 250 subscribers, 5 team members
Built-in endpoint monitoring
Don’t have
charts are powered by its Custom Metric API or external sources such as New Relic or Pingdom, per its homepage
Don’t have
component states come from operators, monitoring integrations, email automation, or its API, per Atlassian's docs
Email and webhook subscriber notifications
Have
on all tiers
Have
core feature on public-page plans
SMS subscriber notifications
Have
through your own Twilio or Vonage account, on higher tiers
Not published
tier placement not stated on the pricing pages we fetched
Custom domain
Have
custom domain and TLS subdomain on all tiers
Have
Hobby plan and above
Team member seats at entry tier
Have
5 team members on Basic ($79/mo), 20 on Standard ($149/mo)
Have
2 team members on Free, 5 on Hobby ($29/mo)
Enterprise options (SSO, custom certificates)
Have
SSO via OIDC or SAML for page access, custom certificates, and an Enterprise tier from $999/mo
Have
audience-specific and private pages on higher Atlassian tiers
Where RealUptime Status fits
Both Status.io and Statuspage are established, currently shipping incident-communication products, and this page is not built to argue RealUptime Status beats either of them. The structural difference worth knowing before choosing between the two: neither runs checks of its own, so whichever you pick, the truthfulness of the page depends on the monitoring you wire into it and on operators updating it during an incident. RealUptime Status is the other architecture: the monitor and the page are one product, every component state is a measurement the product took itself from named regions, and the free plan includes 10 monitors and a public page. If that shape fits your team better than a communication layer over separate monitoring, it is worth a look; if not, the rows above are the decision between these two.