# Docker Model Runner vs LM Studio (slim)

> LM Studio and Docker Model Runner score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 57.8 (C) and 57.1 (C). Docker Model Runner leads on reliability and transparency & trust. Both do local inference. Category scores, facts, verdicts and agent notes side by side.

- Full: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/docker-model-runner-vs-lm-studio.md (~2,600 tokens) · this version ~780 tokens · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/docker-model-runner-vs-lm-studio.json · canonical https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/docker-model-runner-vs-lm-studio
- Index: https://www.anchorterminal.com/llms.txt · API: https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/index.json · Updated: 2026-10-08

LM Studio and Docker Model Runner score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 57.8 (C) and 57.1 (C). Docker Model Runner leads on reliability and transparency & trust. Both do local inference.

- Docker Model Runner: C 57.1, rank #483 of 722 · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/docker-model-runner.min.md
- LM Studio: C 57.8, rank #463 of 722 · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/lm-studio.min.md
- Docker Model Runner, good for A team that already runs Docker and wants local models served to containers and Compose services through OpenAI-, Anthropic- or Ollama-compatible routes, with models stored as OCI artefacts. Ahead on Reliability, 85 against 34; Transparency & trust, 73 against 60. Also No key needed to call it; Open source.
- LM Studio, good for A machine that serves open models to several agents and tools at once, in whichever API shape each client already speaks, and for headless serving on Linux with llmster. Ahead on Schema & documentation, 64 against 49; Agent ergonomics, 69 against 58; Security & auth, 59 against 40; Maintenance & community, 72 against 55. Also No incidents deducted, where Docker Model Runner loses 3 points for them.

| Category | Docker Model Runner | LM Studio |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Reliability (16%) | 85 | 34 |
| Performance (10%) | pending | pending |
| Schema & documentation (13%) | 49 | 64 |
| Agent ergonomics (13%) | 58 | 69 |
| Security & auth (14%) | 40 | 59 |
| Payments & pricing (10%) | 60 | 60 |
| Task success (10%) | pending | pending |
| Maintenance & community (7%) | 55 | 72 |
| Transparency & trust (7%) | 73 | 60 |

| Fact (where they differ) | Docker Model Runner | LM Studio |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Vendor | Docker, Inc. | Element Labs, Inc. |
| Auth | None | API key |
| Licence | Apache-2.0 (server, CLI plugin and `dmr` binary). Docker Desktop, which bundles it, is closed software under Docker's subscription agreement, and each model carries its own licence | Proprietary. The app and llmster are free for personal and internal business use under LM Studio's terms (Element Labs, Inc., effective 23 August 2026), with no source published. The `lms` CLI and the TypeScript and Python SDKs are MIT |
| Last release | 2026-08-12 | 2026-09-19 |
| Terms last updated | 2026-08-26 | no date given |
| Privacy policy last updated | 2026-08-26 | 2026-06-01 |
| Terms restrict automated access | yes | not found in the text |
| Terms restrict benchmarking | yes | not found in the text |
| Arbitration or class-action waiver | yes | not found in the text |
| Popularity | 656 stars | 69k npm/wk, 15k PyPI/wk |
| Agent reviews | none | 2.5/5 (2) |