head to head · open source

Bruno vs kiro-gateway

Bruno has 47,022 GitHub stars, 2,888 forks, 1,831 open issues and last shipped yesterday. kiro-gateway has 2,281 stars, 552 forks, 103 open issues and last shipped 4 months ago. Bruno leads on adoption by 1,961% (47,022 vs 2,281 stars). Bruno is written in JavaScript under MIT; kiro-gateway is written in Python under AGPL-3.0. Bruno has attracted 6% as many forks as stars, kiro-gateway 24%. Bruno was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee.

Two open source projects, one decision. Both are free and self-hostable — the differences are community size, license terms, language stack and release pace.

Bruno ★ 47K kiro-gateway ★ 2.3K category Developer Tools

← all 8884 open source comparisons

Side by side

Bruno kiro-gateway
GitHub stars ★ 47K ★ 2.3K
License MIT AGPL-3.0
Written in JavaScript Python
Last push 2026-09-17 2026-05-18
Forks ⑂ 2.9K ⑂ 552
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick Bruno if

  • You weight community size — 47K stars and counting
  • You want the MIT license terms
  • Your stack matches JavaScript
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full Bruno profile →

pick kiro-gateway if

  • You want the kiro-gateway feature set and don't need the biggest community
  • You prefer the AGPL-3.0 license terms
  • Your stack matches Python
  • You evaluated both and kiro-gateway fits your workflow better

full kiro-gateway profile →

About Bruno

Bruno is a lightweight, open source API client and IDE for exploring and testing APIs, built for developers and teams who want their request collections stored as plain text in a folder on their own filesystem rather than in a vendor's cloud.

read the full Bruno overview →

About kiro-gateway

Kiro Gateway is an open source proxy API gateway that turns the Claude and other models available inside Kiro IDE and Kiro CLI (Amazon Q Developer / AWS CodeWhisperer) into OpenAI and Anthropic compatible API endpoints, for developers who want to reach those models from any client.

read the full kiro-gateway overview →

More in Developer Tools

OpenCode ★ 208K Langflow ★ 155K Supabase ★ 110K pi ★ 107K fastapi ★ 102K Neovim ★ 102K

Related comparisons

fastapi vs bruno hoppscotch vs bruno fastapi vs hoppscotch fastapi vs insomnia fastapi vs one-api fastapi vs openapi-specification fastapi vs openapi-generator fastapi vs redoc opencode vs pi opencode vs openhands opencode vs paperclip opencode vs orca opencode vs cline opencode vs aider opencode vs continue opencode vs tabby opencode vs neovim opencode vs zed langflow vs neovim langflow vs zed opencode vs kilocode opencode vs codeedit neovim vs zed langflow vs kilocode

More API Development & Testing projects

Compare either of these against the rest of the API Development & Testing field.

Bruno vs fastapi Bruno vs Hoppscotch Bruno vs Insomnia Bruno vs one-api Bruno vs OpenAPI-Specification Bruno vs openapi-generator Bruno vs redoc Bruno vs SafeLine Bruno vs Mobile-Security-Framework-MobSF Bruno vs grpc-gateway Bruno vs Yaak Bruno vs hurl

Frequently asked questions

Is Bruno or kiro-gateway more popular?

Bruno has 47,022 GitHub stars and kiro-gateway has 2,281. Bruno has the larger community by that measure.

Are Bruno and kiro-gateway free?

Both are open source. Bruno is licensed under MIT and kiro-gateway under AGPL-3.0. Neither carries a licence fee.

What is the difference between Bruno and kiro-gateway?

Bruno is written in JavaScript and kiro-gateway in Python. The practical differences are community size, licence terms, language stack and release cadence — all compared in the table above.

Which should I choose, Bruno or kiro-gateway?

Choose Bruno if you want the larger community (47,022 stars) or its MIT licence terms. Choose kiro-gateway if its feature set, stack or AGPL-3.0 licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.