Service comparison

4me vs. Accelo

4me vs. Accelo — reliability, API availability, and incident frequency head-to-head.

Last 90 days · 1 incidents total · Data via Pulsetic monitoring

Head-to-head

90-day summary

Uptime over time

Availability across windows

Window 4me Accelo Δ
Last 24 hours
100.00%
100.00%
0.00 pp
Last 7 days
100.00%
100.00%
0.00 pp
Last 30 days
100.00%
100.00%
0.00 pp
Last 90 days
100.00%
99.41%
+0.59 pp

Δ is percentage-point difference (4me minus Accelo). Higher is better.

Incidents 90-day

Severity breakdown

  • 4me

    0 total

    0 major 0 minor
    • Median resolution

    • Longest outage

  • Accelo

    1 total

    0 major 1 minor
    • Median resolution

      12h 47m

    • Longest outage

      12h 47m

Recent activity

Last 5 incidents, side-by-side

  • 4me logo

    4me

    No incidents recorded in the last 90 days.

  • Accelo logo

    Accelo

    • Jul 29

      Service Disruption: Technical Issue Affecting Emails Sent From Accelo

      12h 47m

      Minor
    • Nov 13

      Current Issue with Invoice PDF Generation

      2h 8m

      Minor
    • Oct 20

      Activity Creation and Editor Performance

      6h 18m

      Minor
    • Oct 5

      Service Disruption: Global Search and Stream Issue

      1d 5h 19m

      Minor
    • Jul 25

      20025/07/25 Incident

      < 1m

      Minor

Bottom line

4me wins

4me edges out on 90-day uptime.

4me posted 100.00% vs. 99.41% for Accelo (Δ +0.59 pp). Incidents: 0 vs. 1 (-1).

Where would your uptime rank against 4me?

Pulsetic is website uptime monitoring. Every number on this page came from its checks. Aim one at a website you run and build a 90-day record.

10 monitors free, email alerts on failure and recovery. No credit card.