head to head · open source

conductor vs swarmclaw

conductor has 32,207 GitHub stars, 1,009 forks, 253 open issues and last shipped yesterday. swarmclaw has 673 stars, 137 forks, 18 open issues and last shipped 3 months ago. conductor leads on adoption by 4,686% (32,207 vs 673 stars). conductor is written in Java under Apache-2.0; swarmclaw is written in TypeScript under MIT. conductor has attracted 3% as many forks as stars, swarmclaw 20%. conductor 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.

conductor ★ 32K swarmclaw ★ 673 category Infrastructure & Operations

← all 13541 open source comparisons

Side by side

conductor swarmclaw
GitHub stars ★ 32K ★ 673
License Apache-2.0 MIT
Written in Java TypeScript
Last push 2026-09-18 2026-06-30
Forks ⑂ 1.0K ⑂ 137
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick conductor if

  • You weight community size — 32K stars and counting
  • You want the Apache-2.0 license terms
  • Your stack matches Java
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full conductor profile →

pick swarmclaw if

  • You want the swarmclaw feature set and don't need the biggest community
  • You prefer the MIT license terms
  • Your stack matches TypeScript
  • You evaluated both and swarmclaw fits your workflow better

full swarmclaw profile →

About conductor

Conductor is an Apache 2.0 licensed, event driven agentic workflow engine written in Java that provides durable and highly resilient execution for applications and AI agents, aimed at teams running microservices, AI agents, and adaptive workflow graphs that need orchestration they can version, inspect, and recover.

read the full conductor overview →

About swarmclaw

SwarmClaw is an open source, self hosted AI agent runtime and multi agent framework for autonomous agent swarms, written in TypeScript under the MIT licence for developers and operators who want to run AI agents and agent orchestration on their own infrastructure.

read the full swarmclaw overview →

More in Infrastructure & Operations

Immich ★ 114K Uptime Kuma ★ 91K worldmonitor ★ 87K mall ★ 85K NetData ★ 81K Elasticsearch ★ 78K

Related comparisons

compose vs conductor n8n vs kestra langchain vs haystack llama-index vs haystack compose vs xxl-job langgraph vs haystack compose vs gitleaks trivy vs gitleaks n8n vs huginn uptime-kuma vs worldmonitor uptime-kuma vs netdata uptime-kuma vs grafana worldmonitor vs netdata worldmonitor vs grafana uptime-kuma vs prometheus netdata vs grafana supabase vs nocodb mall vs prometheus mall vs nocodb supabase vs postgrest mall vs etcd mall vs dbeaver mall vs orm prometheus vs nocodb

More Orchestration & Scheduling projects

Compare either of these against the rest of the Orchestration & Scheduling field.

conductor vs ansible conductor vs compose conductor vs xxl-job conductor vs gitleaks conductor vs Kestra conductor vs haystack conductor vs rancher conductor vs Prefect conductor vs Archon conductor vs Temporal conductor vs rowboat conductor vs Trigger

Frequently asked questions

Is conductor or swarmclaw more popular?

conductor has 32,207 GitHub stars and swarmclaw has 673. conductor has the larger community by that measure.

Are conductor and swarmclaw free?

Both are open source. conductor is licensed under Apache-2.0 and swarmclaw under MIT. Neither carries a licence fee.

What is the difference between conductor and swarmclaw?

conductor is written in Java and swarmclaw in TypeScript. The practical differences are community size, licence terms, language stack and release cadence — all compared in the table above.

Which should I choose, conductor or swarmclaw?

Choose conductor if you want the larger community (32,207 stars) or its Apache-2.0 licence terms. Choose swarmclaw if its feature set, stack or MIT licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.