Homey Pro comparison to Hubitat

I switched from Homey to Hubitat Elevation some time ago due to reliability issues I experienced with Homey. While it’s unfortunate that some discussions in forums can become a bit heated, I believe it’s more helpful to focus on sharing insights rather than pointing fingers. I want to offer a balanced perspective based on my own experiences with both platforms.

I’m back on this forum now because while Hubitat has its strengths, it’s not perfect, and I’ve been reconsidering a potential move back to Homey Pro. Homey has an impressive interface, a very powerful Flow editor, and broader support for European devices. However, the issue I experienced was with the reliability of the radio signal and the overall stability, which affected the performance of the flows. These are concerns that persist for me, as they were problematic in my earlier use of Homey.

In contrast, while Hubitat’s interface feels quite dated and creating rules can sometimes be frustrating, once you get the hang of it, it’s incredibly reliable. The radio strength has been outstanding in my experience, and it covers all distances within my home effectively. There’s often talk about radio interference between Zigbee and other devices, but in my case, running Hubitat alongside a Hue hub on different channels works seamlessly.

That being said, Hubitat could definitely improve in areas such as support for more European devices, particularly TRVs, and a more modern interface. Progress has been made, but there’s still room for improvement, and I’m hopeful that the future holds more development—especially with Matter, which could open up more device compatibility.

In the end, both systems have their pros and cons. Homey excels with its sleek interface and ease of use, while Hubitat offers robust reliability once you navigate its learning curve. If you’re sticking with Homey, perhaps try adding more repeaters to boost the radio signal. But if you’re open to trying Hubitat, be prepared for a bit of a learning curve, which, in my case, was worth it for the reliability it offers.

For now, I’m staying with my Hubitat C8 Pro but will continue to watch Homey’s development. Whichever platform ultimately finds the right balance of reliability and user experience will likely determine where I settle. I hope this helps, and that you find the solution that works best for your needs. My aim is not to claim one system is better than the other but to provide an alternative view to consider.

Best of luck in your decision-making!

4 Likes

My €0,02: at some point, you pretty much have all automations set up like you want, and the sleek interface isn’t something you will need on a day-to-day basis.

On the other hand, reliability is key. You don’t want to wake up finding that half your sensors aren’t responding anymore, or that when you switch on your living room lights a random number of them doesn’t switch on, requiring you to go back to that sleek interface to implement workarounds.

I literally have hundreds of devices/integrations that are being managed by my home automation platform, and they just work. Days, even weeks go by without me having to pay attention to it, and when I do, it’s typically to add something new or to just improve something (if I feel like it).

The only issues I run in to have external causes, like a sensor running out of battery or some of my IKEA lights forgetting their settings after a power outage.

So yes: Homey looks incredible, but sometimes I feel that’s just veneer. It has many issues and quirks, often ones that Homey users have grown accustomed to (“I just reboot my Homey every night”). And even though it may support more European devices, my experience is that it still often lacks, especially when it comes to Zigbee devices.

2 Likes

Reliability is indeed crucial, and you are absolutely right—once a system runs smoothly, it often becomes something we can set and forget, without needing a fancy interface. That said, as someone who enjoys tinkering with my setup, I tend to interact with the interface more frequently for review and optimization purposes.

While Hubitat has been consistently reliable in my experience, there are a few limitations that, while not deal-breakers, can cause some frustration. Specifically, the only officially supported TRV has posed ongoing issues for me. Despite setting the desired temperature and mode correctly, my Spirit TRV will sometimes overheat, even when set to 22°C. The only solution I’ve found is to remove and reinsert the batteries. Additionally, these units are prone to malfunctioning—about one of my ten units fails annually—and replacements are often hard to find.

Another challenge is that the TRV’s logic involves listening to the network for a brief period, then going into sleep mode. As a result, there can be delays in responsiveness—sometimes it reacts immediately, but other times I have to resend commands multiple times. My previous system handled these delays gracefully, always setting the correct temperature, even if with a slight delay. Hubitat, unfortunately, doesn’t seem to manage this as well. To mitigate this, I’ve created a custom rule that loops through commands, setting the temperature, waiting 10 seconds, and verifying until it’s correct.

Given that this is the only officially supported TRV, I believe it would be helpful for Hubitat to address these issues more effectively. I’ve raised this in the community forums several times, and while staff have responded, we have yet to see changes or broader support for other TRVs.

OK, after having a closer look, I’m not sure that this :

is really better than this :

If you don’t mind me sharing my personal experience… My experience with Hubitat has been very different. I actually got led to this post when Googling for “Hubitat alternatives” - I was looking for a different Hub (alternatives of Hubitat) because I had enough of Hubitat.

I had Hubitat for a little over two years now, and from the very beginning I had to schedule daily reboot of the hub (at 3 am), or some of the rules simply would not run. This wasn’t too bad. Even though it’s not ideal, I would’ve been happy to live with a daily reboot.

I was able to pair a number of different devices both Zigbee and Z-Wave with a very few exceptions (usually very cheap Chinese sensors that I suspect are not really 100% Zigbee/Z-wave compliant). So, I concur the compatibility and support for wide range of devices is one of the Hubitat’s fortes.

However, I did have some devices started falling off the network and the Hub no longer received signals from them over time… The number of dropped out devices were small enough, and my passion for home automation somewhat cooled off :), so I could’ve lived with what I still had working.

Then about a couple of months ago the hub started acting up. Some rules started not working (with no changes), some devices, which still show connected, started not sending any events, and etc. I think it started happening after some major update on the firmware (I noticed some changes in UI, too). I could not even delete any of the existing rules - when I try to delete a rule, it spins the circle for a several painful minutes and gives me an error message at the end. After that the Hub becomes even slower.

It has become so bad that I decided to perform a soft reset the other night. Right after the reset things seemed to run faster, and I was able pair a few devices without any issues (all the previously paired devices were wiped out after the reset so I had to pair them again). However, today I tried to logon to the hub to pair the rest of the devices, but I cannot logon to the hub! I power cycled the hub but still can’t get to the maintenance page.

In short, the reliability (lack of it) has been my biggest complaint on Hubitat. I am surprised to learn that it actually is one of the strengths of Hubitat :frowning: If that’s true that’s very disappointing and discouraging since it means other Hubs are worse than this.

1 Like

Hi John,

In the meantime, I’ve been transitioning to Apple HomeKit, and I would say I’m about 85% done. The main reason for this decision was the lack of support for European TRVs. While HomeKit does require third-party apps to create complex automation rules, I find it to be very stable overall.

Whenever possible, I’ve opted for Matter devices over Thread. My Thread network has proven to be exceptionally strong—I haven’t experienced a single unresponsive device. One of the key advantages of HomeKit is its redundancy: if you have multiple Apple TVs, HomePods, or HomePod Minis, they all act as controllers, ensuring that if one fails, another seamlessly takes over. I haven’t seen any other system with such a reliable fallback mechanism.

That said, I believe that user experiences can vary significantly, even within the same ecosystem. No two homes are alike, and factors such as the placement of the central hub, wall materials, thermal insulation (especially if aluminum foil is involved), the location of wired repeater devices, and even the selected network channel can all influence performance.

On Hubitat, there is a setting for signal strength that defaults to an energy-efficient mode, but it can be adjusted to a higher level—something many users may not be aware of. In HomeKit, you can also fine-tune the signal strength per repeater device, which provides some flexibility in optimizing coverage.

A few years ago, I invested in three ASUS XT-8 access points to eliminate Wi-Fi dead spots in my home, and now I can maintain a strong connection even from about 15 meters outside. However, last week, I replaced one of my last Eufy cameras with a HomeKit-compatible camera and placed it at the corner of my house. Despite being only six meters away from the access point, with just an exterior wall in between, there was no signal. The issue was the angle—the signal had to travel not only through the 40 cm outer wall but also along a second wall at an angle for about four meters. A simple $25 repeater solved the problem when placed on the opposite side of the room.

Of course, HomeKit has some limitations, but many of them can be worked around. After using it for several months, I wouldn’t consider switching back to another system. And even in the unlikely event that Apple were to discontinue HomeKit—which seems improbable given their renewed commitment to smart home technology—my Matter devices would remain compatible with numerous other platforms available today.

Thank you for sharing your experience, and have a great day!

2 Likes

Homekit automations became very powerful with last major ios update. However homey advanced flows are way better.

No one will prevent you from using them with homey btw.

1 Like

This is just bsht trying to make layout look stupid.
Pull the cards away from each other and it makes perfect sense…

I’ve got more complicated flows and they are perfectly ‘readable’…

2 Likes

The main advantages of HomeKit are:

  • Seamless controller fallback: If one controller becomes unavailable, HomeKit automatically switches to another without requiring user intervention, ensuring reliability.
  • No extra drivers or apps needed: HomeKit and Matter devices work natively without requiring additional drivers or apps, simplifying setup and usage. Other systems rely on extra software, often from a community, which can add complexity, incompatibility issues and unresponsiveness. Also, adding devices with a QR code is very simple.
1 Like

Luckily, it’s the same with Homey, the great thing about Matter is that it standardizes everything across all platforms. So no custom integrations are required :wink:

1 Like