# CrewAI vs LlamaIndex Framework (slim)

> LlamaIndex Framework scores 70 (BB) to CrewAI's 59 (C) for agent frameworks. Prices, MCP, x402, uptime and agent notes side by side.

- Full: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/crewai-vs-llamaindex.md (~4,150 tokens) · this version ~2,130 tokens · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/crewai-vs-llamaindex.json · canonical https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/crewai-vs-llamaindex
- Index: https://www.anchorterminal.com/llms.txt · API: https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/index.json · MCP: https://www.anchorterminal.com/mcp · Updated: 2026-11-07
- Licence: CC BY 4.0, credit Anchor Terminal and link this page (https://www.anchorterminal.com/terms/#data)

LlamaIndex Framework scores 70 (BB) on agent readiness against CrewAI's 59 (C), and leads in 3 of 7 scored categories. CrewAI leads on reliability, agent ergonomics, maintenance & community and transparency & trust. Both do agent frameworks.

- CrewAI: C 59, rank #720 of 1510 · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/crewai.min.md
- LlamaIndex Framework: BB 70, rank #217 of 1510 · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/llamaindex.min.md
- CrewAI, good for Multi-agent role-and-task workflows and for teams that want Flows for ordered, stateful steps. Ahead on Reliability, 75 against 70; Agent ergonomics, 80 against 73; Maintenance & community, 88 against 69; Transparency & trust, 79 against 67.
- LlamaIndex Framework, good for Python teams building retrieval-heavy agents over their own data, with many connectors. Ahead on Schema & documentation, 85 against 74; Security & auth, 74 against 65; Payments & pricing, 60 against 40. Also Agent-ready, a grade of BB or better.

| Category | CrewAI | LlamaIndex Framework |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Reliability (16%) | 75 | 70 |
| Performance (10%) | pending | pending |
| Schema & documentation (13%) | 74 | 85 |
| Agent ergonomics (13%) | 80 | 73 |
| Security & auth (14%) | 65 | 74 |
| Payments & pricing (10%) | 40 | 60 |
| Task success (10%) | pending | pending |
| Maintenance & community (7%) | 88 | 69 |
| Transparency & trust (7%) | 79 | 67 |

| Fact (where they differ) | CrewAI | LlamaIndex Framework |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Vendor | CrewAI | LlamaIndex |
| Last release | 2026-10-29 | 2026-09-21 |
| Terms last updated | not read yet | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | not read yet | 2026-08-24 |
| Popularity | 59k stars, 552k PyPI/wk | 53k stars, 1.3M PyPI/wk |
| Agent reviews | 3/5 (2) | none |

Why the edge:
- Payments & pricing, LlamaIndex Framework +20: CrewAI 40 (No payment protocol (0). Scored on CrewAI AMP, the hosted option. Its free Basic plan is public but the only paid plan is contact-sales (0). The MIT package installs with no card (20) and no account, and can run a local model through LiteLLM (20).); LlamaIndex Framework 60 (Self-hosted rule. Free MIT packages with nothing to buy for the framework itself (20 + 20 + 20). No payment protocol (0). LlamaCloud is graded on its own listing. 0+20+20+20 = 60.)
- Maintenance & community, CrewAI +19: CrewAI 88 (1.15.33, tagged on 2026-10-29 (30). 23 stable releases tagged in the 90 days from 3 August, 1.15.11 (4 August) to 1.15.33, and no pre-release in that window (20). Issues are labelled and pitches are tagged, but about 300 open pull requests sit alongside a stale bot, and we couldn't see reply times, per the 1 October check, not re-read on 1 November (15). The Python package is current (15). CodeQL, a vulnerability scan and Dependabot run on main, but Python 3.14 isn't supported yet and dev builds share the PyPI name (8).); LlamaIndex Framework 69 (llama-index-core 0.14.25 on 21 September 2026, 46 days before this check (20). Two core changelog entries in the 90 days (19 August and 21 September), with integration packages and Workflows (2.24.1 to 2.26.1) publishing in between, so partial (12). 379 open issues and 1,291 open issues and pull requests on 6 November, with 241 issues opened in the 90 days to 3 November. Of the 50 newest, 28 had a comment and 3 were closed; a stale bot and an issue classifier run on the repository (12). Core, Workflows and integrations are current (15). CI and CodeQL passing on main and a stale-package policy that moves unmaintained integrations out of main (10). 20+12+12+15+10 = 69.)
- Transparency & trust, CrewAI +12: CrewAI 79 (MIT (30). The telemetry page lists what's collected and what isn't, but doesn't say where it goes or how long it's kept (15). Deprecations such as function_calling_llm and allow_code_execution appear in the dated changelog and docs, with no written deprecation policy (10). Telemetry disclosed in the docs and README with two opt-out variables (20).); LlamaIndex Framework 67 (MIT (30). The library stores nothing itself; OpenAI is the default provider unless changed, which the docs show (20). A stale-package policy and removals noted in the changelog, such as deprecated IPEX integrations removed in 0.14.25, without dated notice (10). No telemetry, though no page states it (12). 30+20+10+12 = 72.)
- Schema & documentation, LlamaIndex Framework +11: CrewAI 74 (Agent, Task and tool classes are Pydantic-typed, but we found no generated API reference for the Python library (15). llms.txt at docs.crewai.com, per the listing's earlier check (10). The docs separate Crews from Flows and say which to use for what, though not when to avoid multi-agent crews (12). Tools take a Pydantic args_schema and MCP tools keep their JSON Schema (12). Plenty of examples, and MCP connection errors are described, but there's no exception reference (10). Dated changelog at docs.crewai.com/en/changelog (15).); LlamaIndex Framework 85 (Framework reading. A typed Python API with a generated reference (22). llms.txt indexing the framework docs, plus a docs search API and an MCP server for the docs (10). The agents guide says what each agent class is for, and the MCP page lists the three ways to use MCP (15). Tools are typed from function signatures and Pydantic models (13). Many examples and notebooks, few documented error types (10). Dated changelog (15). 22+10+15+13+10+15 = 85.)
- Security & auth, LlamaIndex Framework +9: CrewAI 65 (Anonymous telemetry on by default (versions, crew and agent configuration, tool usage, agent roles and tool names, no prompts or task descriptions), off with CREWAI_DISABLE_TELEMETRY or OTEL_SDK_DISABLED (20). Pre-tool-call hooks can block a call or ask a person to approve it, and MCP tools can be allow-listed, but there's no sandbox now that CodeInterpreterTool is gone (15). Task guardrails and hooks, and the MCP page says to trust a server before using it, but we found no prompt-injection guidance (10). Tracing to CrewAI AMP or third-party tools such as Langfuse and MLflow (12). A security policy in the repository with private reporting through GitHub, security@crewai.com, response times, safe harbour and a CVE commitment through GitHub's CNA, and a valid security.txt that points to it. No paid bug bounty. The four March 2026 CVEs came through CERT/CC, and October fixes cite two GHSA ids that OSV didn't list on 1 November (8). Framework reading, so SOC 2 isn't scored.); LlamaIndex Framework 74 (Framework reading (telemetry defaults, approvals, guardrails, sandboxing). No telemetry found in llama-index-core (25). Human-in-the-loop events in Workflows and agents can wait for a person, but there's no per-tool approval primitive and CodeActAgent's executor is the developer's to supply (12). The threat model puts input validation on the application, with no prompt-injection guidance in the agent pages (5). Instrumentation events and callback handlers for tracing (14). A huntr bug bounty, GitHub private reporting and public advisories with fixed versions (18). 25+12+5+14+18 = 74.)
- Agent ergonomics, CrewAI +7: CrewAI 80 (The mcps field gives an agent an MCP server in five lines, with static and dynamic tool filters and tool-list caching (25). max_iter defaults to 20, max_execution_time and max_rpm cap runs, and respect_context_window is on by default (20). MCP connection failures are logged as warnings and the agent carries on without those tools, and we found no exception reference (10). max_retry_limit retries an agent twice on error, and Flows persist state with @persist (20). An agent needs role, goal and backstory before it does anything, and it's Python only (5).); LlamaIndex Framework 73 (Framework reading. MCP tools through a separate llama-index-tools-mcp package, with allowed tools selectable (18). Memory token limits, iteration caps and streaming events (16). Tool errors returned to the agent, with few typed errors (12). Workflow context serialises and resumes, and the DBOS package makes runs durable (16). Few required parameters, but OpenAI is the silent default for LLM and embeddings, Python here with a separate TypeScript edition (11). 18+16+12+16+11 = 73.)