Detailed comparison across 10 dimensions
Winner: Opencost
OpenCost clearly comes out ahead of Chronosphere on Staquest's weighted six-dimension score. OpenCost has a free tier; Chronosphere does not.
| Overview | ||
|---|---|---|
| Type | saas tool | saas tool |
| Company | Chronosphere | CNCF |
| Free Tier | ||
| Has API | ||
| Open Source | ||
| Learning Curve | - | - |
| Integration | - | - |
| Trending | Stable | Stable |
| GitHub Stars | - | - |
| Industries | DevelopmentSaaS & Cloud | DevelopmentSaaS & Cloud |
| Categories | observability-apm | devops |
| Website | Visit | Visit |
Opencost
custom
open source
| Feature | chronosphere | opencost |
|---|---|---|
| Custom Data Retention And Transformation | ||
| Mcp Support | ||
| Enterprise-Grade Security And Support | ||
| Multi-Cloud Cost Monitoring (Aws, Gcp, Azure) | ||
| Observability Platform | ||
| On-Premises Kubernetes Support | ||
| Telemetry Pipeline | ||
| Opencost Ui | ||
| Prometheus-Native Metrics | ||
| Real-Time Cost Allocation By Kubernetes Cluster, Node, Namespace, Controller, And Pod |
Showing 10 of 10 features
Dashes mean the feature isn't listed in our data. The tool may still support it.
On Staquest's weighted six-dimension scoring, OpenCost comes out ahead overall, though Chronosphere can be the better fit depending on your priorities — see the dimension-by-dimension breakdown above.
OpenCost offers a free tier; Chronosphere does not currently list one.
OpenCost is open source. The feature comparison and dimension scores above cover the full breakdown.
