Linear and Loom represent two approaches to collaboration tool reliability. Linear achieved 99.74% uptime with zero incidents during the monitoring period, while Loom maintained 100% uptime. Response times differed notably: Loom averaged 98ms compared to Linear's 238ms.
- Loom achieved 100% uptime vs. Linear's 99.74% during the monitoring period
- Loom responded 2.4× faster on average (98ms vs. 238ms)
- Both providers reported zero incidents and zero downtime minutes
- All data collected by Uptrue's independent monitoring infrastructure
Uptime This Week
Both providers demonstrated strong uptime performance with no recorded incidents. Loom achieved perfect 100% uptime while Linear's 99.74% represents approximately 3.74 minutes of potential unavailability over a 30-day cycle. The difference is marginal for most production use cases.
Response Time
Loom's average response time of 98ms significantly outpaced Linear's 238ms—a 140ms differential. This 2.4× speed advantage may impact user experience in latency-sensitive workflows, though both remain within acceptable ranges for synchronous collaboration tools.
Incidents & Downtime
Neither provider experienced measurable incidents during the monitoring window. Both reported zero downtime minutes, indicating stable infrastructure performance across their respective platforms during this period.
Which Should You Choose?
Choose Loom for teams prioritizing response speed and perfect availability; Linear remains a solid choice for issue tracking workflows where the marginal uptime difference is negligible. Both are production-ready based on this monitoring data.
All uptime, response time, and incident data is collected by Uptrue's independent monitoring infrastructure. HTTP checks run every 5 minutes. An incident is recorded only after 2+ consecutive failed checks. Uptrue is not affiliated with any monitored service. For corrections: reports@uptrue.io