I got tired of paying $29/mo for a status page. So I built my own.
I was building a side project and needed a simple way to tell my users when something was down.
Every tool I found started at $29/mo. For a side project. Just to say "we're working on it."
So I spent a couple of months building Statsy.
What it does:
Auto uptime monitoring — paste your URL, it pings every 5 minutes
Public status page at yourname.statsy.page
Email notifications for subscribers when something goes down
Incident timeline so users can follow along
Embeddable badge for your site (auto refreshes according to the current status)
Free plan covers most indie products. 1 page, 3 services, 50 subscribers, no credit card needed.
Pro is $15/mo if you need custom domains or more services.
It's fully live at statsy.page and only takes about 2 minutes to set up.
I have a handful of users right now, so I would genuinely love feedback from this community. What's missing? What would make you actually use it?
This is a useful indie wedge because status pages are one of those products people do not want to think about until something breaks. The value is not just uptime monitoring. It is giving small teams a simple trust layer when users are asking, “is this broken or is it just me?”
The pricing angle is also clear. $29/mo feels heavy for side projects and early SaaS, so a lighter status page with monitoring, subscriber emails, badges, and incident history makes sense.
One thing I’d pressure-test early is the brand frame. Statsy is friendly and simple, but it may also make the product feel a little lightweight for something that sits in the trust and reliability layer of a product. If founders are putting this in front of users during downtime, the name has to feel calm and dependable, not just cute.
Xevoa .com would fit better if you want this to feel like a broader reliability/workflow platform for indie products and small SaaS teams. Same product, same simplicity, but with a name that gives it more room if you later add team alerts, incident workflows, integrations, custom domains, or release/status communication.
This feels worth thinking through now because status pages become part of customer trust very quickly once users start subscribing to incidents.
Really appreciate the thoughtful breakdown, the 'is this broken or is it just me?' framing is exactly the trust gap I'm trying to fill, might steal that for the landing page.
On the name, fair point about perception, but changing it now would be a bigger distraction than the problem it solves. Statsy stays for now, and I'll let the product build the trust association over time.
I'm curious tho, does the current landing page feel lightweight to you, or is it purely the name?
I’d separate the two.
The landing page can absolutely make Statsy feel more serious if the first message is built around trust, incidents, user confidence, and “is this broken or just me?” instead of just cheap status pages.
But the name still sets the first mental frame before the copy gets read.
Statsy is friendly and easy to remember, which is good. The tradeoff is that it sounds more like a lightweight indie tool than a trust/reliability layer users may see during downtime.
So the landing page has to work harder to create seriousness.
That is why I mentioned Xevoa.com. It gives the same simple product more platform weight if the roadmap moves into alerts, incident workflows, integrations, and customer communication.
If Statsy stays, I’d make the page compensate strongly: less “simple status page” and more “your public trust layer when things break.”
The real question is whether you want the brand itself to carry that trust, or whether you’re comfortable making the product and copy earn it over time.
This reframe is genuinely useful. 'Simple and cheap' gets people to click, but 'trust layer when things break' is what makes them actually set it up. Going to rework the hero copy around that angle and see if it changes conversion.
Keeping Statsy as the name currently. Appreciate the feedback.
That makes sense.
If you keep Statsy, the hero has to do more of the trust-building work upfront. “Simple and cheap” creates interest, but “your public trust layer when things break” gives founders a stronger reason to actually install it.
I’d test that shift first and watch whether it changes setup intent, not just clicks.
If the trust/reliability angle starts outperforming the lightweight-status-page angle, then you’ll know whether the name is still carrying the product well or whether it starts feeling smaller than the category.