6 free alternatives to Expose

Serveo's free plan includes 3 active tunnels, custom subdomains, and encrypted public forwarding without a proprietary client download. That makes it useful when you want to keep a few local services exposed at once, especially for hobby work, webhook checks, demos, or local device access. The main free-tier tradeoff is the interstitial warning on tunnels, which Expose does not list. Serveo beats Expose on concurrent tunnel count and named subdomains. It falls short on the subject's explicit TLS/SSL and on having a clearly described server-region setup. Switch if you need a small number of always-on development tunnels with custom naming.

• Beats Expose: 3 active tunnels and custom subdomains
• Falls short: No explicit TLS/SSL item in the free tier
• Who should switch: Switch to Serveo if you want a few concurrent shared tunnels and can live with an interstitial warning.

See the full listing

Pinggy's free plan includes single-command tunneling across HTTP(S), TCP, UDP, and TLS, plus live header manipulation, request-response inspection, and replays. It is the strongest option here for traffic debugging and protocol flexibility, not just basic sharing. The free tier also includes random subdomains and unlimited data transfer, so it is suited to heavier inspection work than a simple demo tunnel. Compared with Expose, Pinggy beats it on protocol breadth and debugging tools. It falls short because the free tunnels time out after 60 minutes and require a credit card, which is a bigger friction point than Expose's free account. Switch if your priority is testing and debugging traffic rather than keeping a tunnel open indefinitely.

• Beats Expose: HTTP, TCP, UDP, and TLS support with built-in debugging tools
• Falls short: 60-minute tunnel timeout and card required
• Who should switch: Switch to Pinggy if you need protocol coverage and request inspection more than long-lived access.

See the full listing

Conveyor's free tier gives you random subdomains, 4 hours per day of continuous connection time, and 500 MB of traffic per day. That makes it a practical choice for short daily testing windows, especially if you are validating a web app from phones, tablets, or another computer. It is more generous than Expose on explicit daily connection time and traffic allowance, but less flexible in region and less direct if you need an open-ended shared link. Conveyor beats Expose on measurable daily usage limits. It falls short because the free tier is still capped every day and a card is not clearly absent. Switch if your work fits into short, predictable test sessions.

• Beats Expose: 4 hours per day of connection time and 500 MB/day traffic
• Falls short: Daily caps instead of a simple shared tunnel model
• Who should switch: Switch to Conveyor if you work in short testing bursts and want a daily quota you can plan around.

See the full listing

localhost.run is the closest to a frictionless sharing workflow because its free domains remain free indefinitely and it can instantly share a web application running on any computer. There is no stated usage cap in the free tier, so it is the best fit when you mainly need a simple public URL for a local app and do not want to manage a limit. Compared with Expose, it beats it on permanence and simplicity. It falls short because the free-tier description gives less explicit control detail than Expose's secure-tunnel features and server selection. Switch if you want the least maintenance and a link you can keep using over time.

• Beats Expose: Free domains that remain free indefinitely
• Falls short: Less explicit free-tier detail around tunnel controls and server choice
• Who should switch: Switch to localhost.run if your main need is a simple, persistent public URL for a local web app.

See the full listing

ngrok's free offering includes 3 online endpoints, 1 GB of data transfer, 20k HTTP/S requests, an assigned dev domain, one team member, one development domain, one TCP address, and 24 hours of traffic inspector retention. It is the most feature-rich free option for builders who care about observability and API testing alongside tunnels. Compared with Expose, it beats it on endpoint management, request quotas, and inspection tooling. It falls short because the free plan includes an interstitial page on HTTP/S endpoints and only offers a one-time $5 usage credit, which makes it less clean for ongoing free use. Switch if you need a broader development platform, not just tunnel sharing.

• Beats Expose: More endpoints, request allowance, and inspection features
• Falls short: Interstitial page and only one-time usage credit
• Who should switch: Switch to ngrok if you need tunnel sharing plus traffic inspection and endpoint management.

See the full listing

ZeroTier's free tier includes 10 devices, 1 network, 1 network admin, community support, and documentation access. It is the best fit when your problem is connecting machines into a private network rather than publishing a single web service. That makes it more suitable for device coordination, internal access, and small personal network setups than Expose's tunnel-sharing model. ZeroTier beats Expose on device and network scope for private connectivity. It falls short because it is not a direct public tunnel service and does not provide the same shared URL workflow. Switch if you need a small, persistent overlay network instead of a public-facing tunnel.

• Beats Expose: 10 devices and a full private network model
• Falls short: Not a direct public tunnel sharing tool
• Who should switch: Switch to ZeroTier if you need device-to-device connectivity rather than a public URL.

See the full listing