Alternatives

6 free alternatives to localhost.run

Builders who need anything beyond an always-free, no-signup web app tunnel should look elsewhere, because localhost.run is great for frictionless sharing but does not add the protocol, team, or traffic controls some teams need.

Category: Tunnels & VPNsVerified

Where localhost.run's free tier stops

localhost.run localhost.run's free tier stops being interesting only when its basic shape is not enough: it offers free domains that remain free indefinitely and lets you instantly share a web application running on any computer. The free tier, as described here, does not state any usage cap, but it also does not list team features, traffic limits, protocol breadth, or management controls. If you need anything beyond a simple permanent public tunnel for a local web app, the next step is usually a different free tier with explicit limits and extra controls.

Switch table

localhost.runServeoPinggyExposeConveyorngrokVPN.net - Hamachi by LogMeIn
tunnels or endpointsUnlimited stated free domains3 active tunnelsNot statedNot statedNot statedUp to 3 online endpointsUp to 5 computers per network
protocols supportedSSH-based web app tunnelingSSH / WireGuard / browser extensionHTTP(S), TCP, UDP, TLSSecure tunnels with TLS/SSLLocal web server tunnelingHTTP, TCP, TLSVPN connectivity
traffic allowanceNot statedNot statedUnlimited data transferNot stated500 MB per dayUp to 1 GB data transferNot stated
connection timeNot statedNot stated60-minute tunnel timeoutTime-limited free account access4 hours per dayNot statedNot stated
custom or assigned subdomainsFree domains remain free indefinitelyCustom subdomainsRandom subdomainsRandom URLsRandom subdomainsAssigned dev domainNot stated
network sizeNot applicableNot applicableNot applicableNot applicableNot applicableNot applicableUp to 5 computers per network
Card required-NoYesNoYesYesYes
First paid tier-Pro Plan, $6 per monthPro, varies by usagePro, $79 per user per yearBasic, $5 per monthHobbyist, $8 monthly, billed annuallyStandard, $49 per year

The alternatives

Serveo

FTV 51 / 100

Serveo's free plan gives you 3 active tunnels, custom subdomains, and SSH-based remote port forwarding without a proprietary client or download. That makes it a practical free option for hobby projects, webhook checks, demos, and local device access. The tradeoff is the interstitial warning on free-plan tunnels, which localhost.run does not mention in its free offering. If you want a familiar tunnel workflow but need a few separate tunnels or named subdomains, Serveo is a reasonable switch.

  • Beats localhost.run: 3 active tunnels and custom subdomains
  • Falls short: It shows an interstitial warning on free-plan tunnels
  • Who should switch: Switch to Serveo if you need a few named tunnels and can live with the warning page.

Pinggy

FTV 47 / 100

Pinggy's free tier is broad on protocol support: it includes HTTP(S), TCP, UDP, and TLS tunnels, plus live header manipulation, request-response inspection and replays, single-command tunneling, random subdomains, and unlimited data transfer. That is more flexible than localhost.run when you are not just sharing a web app but also testing traffic flows or non-HTTP services. The main compromise is that the free plan has a 60-minute tunnel timeout and random subdomains, so it is better for short sessions than long-lived sharing. If you need protocol variety and debugging tools, this is the one to try.

  • Beats localhost.run: Protocol breadth and debugging tools
  • Falls short: The free tunnel times out after 60 minutes
  • Who should switch: Switch to Pinggy if you need to inspect, replay, or test more than plain web traffic.

Expose

FTV 61 / 100

Expose's free tier includes TLS/SSL encryption, random URLs for shared tunnels, single EU server access, and free account access that is time-limited. It is a fit for builders who want secure sharing without opening ports or changing router settings, and it overlaps well with localhost.run for simple local web app exposure. Where it improves on localhost.run is in the explicit secure-tunnel packaging and account-based management shape, even though the free tier is time-limited. If you are comfortable with a capped free window and want a secured tunnel service, Expose is worth a look.

  • Beats localhost.run: TLS/SSL encryption with account-based access
  • Falls short: Free access is time-limited
  • Who should switch: Switch to Expose if secure tunneling matters more than having an indefinite free domain.

Conveyor

FTV 38 / 100

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 useful when you need a predictable daily allowance for testing web apps, APIs, or webhooks from other devices. Compared with localhost.run's indefinite free domain model, Conveyor is more restrictive because it is tied to daily time and traffic caps. Still, the free plan is simple and enough for short debugging sessions. If your workflow is bursty and you want a fixed daily budget, Conveyor fits well.

  • Beats localhost.run: Explicit daily connection time and traffic allowances
  • Falls short: It is capped at 4 hours per day and 500 MB per day
  • Who should switch: Switch to Conveyor if you want a bounded daily free allowance instead of an open-ended tunnel.

ngrok

FTV 28 / 100

ngrok's free tier includes up to 3 online endpoints, up to 1 GB of data transfer, up to 20k HTTP/S requests, an assigned dev domain, 3 concurrent agents, 1 development domain, 1 TCP address, 24 hours of traffic inspector retention, and a team member slot. It is much broader than localhost.run when you need endpoint management, observability, or more than a simple web tunnel. The downside is the interstitial page on HTTP/S endpoints and the fact that the free tier is clearly capped. If you want tunnel plus inspection and can accept the limits, ngrok is the most feature-rich free move.

  • Beats localhost.run: Endpoint management and traffic inspection features
  • Falls short: It has caps and an interstitial page on HTTP/S endpoints
  • Who should switch: Switch to ngrok if you need observability and multiple endpoints more than an always-free public domain.

VPN.net Hamachi's free tier allows up to 5 computers per network, which makes it a fit for virtual private network use rather than public web exposure. It is the stronger choice when you need private, encrypted, LAN-like connectivity among a small set of machines instead of a public tunnel to a browser-accessible app. Compared with localhost.run, it is solving a different problem: private networking over exposing a web service. If your real need is small-team machine-to-machine access, Hamachi is a better match than a tunneling service.

  • Beats localhost.run: Private network size for machine-to-machine connectivity
  • Falls short: It is not a public web app tunnel
  • Who should switch: Switch to Hamachi if you need a small private VPN rather than an internet-facing app share.

Two quick picks

Closest drop-in

Serveo

Serveo is the closest drop-in for localhost.run because it keeps the same general SSH tunneling workflow and free custom naming, so the behavior change is small for someone already sharing local web apps over a terminal command.

Most free headroom

Pinggy

Pinggy gives the most free headroom because its free tier is the broadest on protocols and includes unlimited data transfer, so you hit a function limit later than with the more narrowly capped alternatives.

Frequently asked questions

Does localhost.run's free tier have a stated usage limit?

No stated usage cap appears in the free tier items here. It is described as free indefinitely, with free domains that remain free indefinitely.

Which alternative is best if I need custom subdomains for free?

Serveo is the clearest match because its free plan includes custom subdomains. ngrok gives an assigned dev domain instead, not free custom subdomains.

Which alternative is best for short-lived testing sessions?

Conveyor and Pinggy both fit short sessions, but Pinggy is stronger if you need multiple protocols and inspection tools, while Conveyor is simpler if you just want a daily time allowance.

Which alternative is closest if I want the same simple web app sharing flow?

Serveo is the closest because it still centers on SSH-style remote forwarding for exposing a local server, so the switch is mostly about limits and warning behavior rather than a different product shape.

Bottom line

For most builders, Serveo is the best alternative to try first. It stays closest to localhost.run's terminal-based tunnel workflow and free subdomain model, so the switch is low-friction. If you only need to share a local web app and want a simple free fallback with a small number of active tunnels, Serveo is the most natural next step. If you need more protocol variety or inspection tools, move up to Pinggy instead.

Read the full listing for localhost.run. Scores use the FTV methodology at /ftv. Browse more alternatives on /alternatives, or head-to-head comparisons on /compare.