Global board
Live on the global board at #1. 6 current listings.

openstatus

openstatus.dev
7.42

Overall / 10

7.01/108.24/10
⅔ Idea⅓ Website

Idea

⅔ of total

Problem relevance

3.75/5

Differentiation

3.25/5

Solution strength

3.75/5

Market opportunity

3.25/5

Feasibility & scalability

3.50/5

Website

⅓ of total

Messaging clarity

4.50/5

UX & conversion

4.00/5

Visual hierarchy

4.00/5

Trust & evidence

4.25/5

Technical quality

3.75/5
Share your result onX
openstatus on StartupBench — score card preview

Add your score to your website
Your StartupBench score badge

Links to this result. Free, with no scripts.

3 judges per areaMedian aggregationMethod 1.1-beta87% AI-estimated confidence

Analysis

From your analysis

Working well

The incident workflow is concrete: regional checks, alerts, status-page updates, maintenance windows, subscriber notifications, and timestamped histories connect detection to communication.

To improve

Publish independently verifiable monitoring metrics, such as probe availability, alert latency, false-positive rates, and regional coverage details, to support the 28-region and automatic-update claims.

Differentiation3.25/5

The strongest differentiators are the combination of open-source/self-hosted deployment, managed SaaS, audit-log-oriented incident records, and a shared programmatic interface spanning API, CLI, SDK, Terraform, and MCP. However, the profile names substantial alternatives, including BetterStack, Checkly, UptimeRobot, Incident.io, Status.io, and Atlassian Status Page, without verified comparative evidence showing that…

Claimed delivery options include managed SaaS and self-hosted open source.

Room to grow

+0.69 possible

Current

7.42

Target

8.11/10

If all 6 criteria below reach 4/5. A scenario, not a prediction.

Differentiation

3.25 → 4.00/5

Run the same task in your product and its closest alternative. Compare the result, steps and cost.

What all 6 need to reach 4/5
  • Differentiation · Idea3.25 → 4.00/5

    The comparison shows a product advantage that matters to the target user.

  • Market opportunity · Idea3.25 → 4.00/5

    The requests describe your use case and why existing options fall short.

  • Feasibility & scalability · Idea3.50 → 4.00/5

    The process works beyond a hand-picked example, with its manual steps and scaling limits explained.

  • Problem relevance · Idea3.75 → 4.00/5

    Users describe the same recurring problem and its cost in time, money or missed work.

  • Solution strength · Idea3.75 → 4.00/5

    The example shows how the product solves the stated problem and where it falls short.

  • Technical quality · Website3.75 → 4.00/5

    The page has usable structure and navigation. Report only checks that were actually run.

All changes above are required. Higher scores and the formula stay unchanged. Ordered by scoring impact, not effort. Only a new evaluation can change your score or board rank.

Owner access

Enter your access key to view the full analysis and manage this startup.

No access key? Verify ownership with support.

See StartupBench’s full analysis