Head to head · Guard moderation · October 2026 research run
Granite Guardian vs Llama Guard 4
Granite Guardian scores 60.1 (C) on agent readiness against Llama Guard 4's 49.1 (D), and leads in every scored category. Both do guard moderation.
Which one, for what
Good for A team with a GPU that wants one English-language judge for harm, jailbreaks, RAG groundedness, function-call checks and house rules, under a permissive licence with no gate.
Ahead on
- Reliability, 56 against 38
- Schema & documentation, 60 against 52
- Security & auth, 58 against 53
- Payments & pricing, 60 against 45
- Maintenance & community, 47 against 28
- Transparency & trust, 70 against 55
Watch for
Trained and tested on English only, per the model card
Good for A team outside the EU with a GPU that wants content moderation of text and images on its own hardware, against a fixed 14-category policy it can edit in the prompt.
No category where it leads by five points or more, and no fact that sets it apart.
Watch for
Weights last changed on 29 April 2025, with no changelog, version tags or stated deprecation policy
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | Granite Guardian | Llama Guard 4 | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reliability | 16%20 | 56 | 38 | Granite Guardian +18 |
| Performance | 10%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Schema & documentation | 13%16.2 | 60 | 52 | Granite Guardian +8 |
| Agent ergonomics | 13%16.2 | 69 | 67 | Granite Guardian +2 |
| Security & auth | 14%17.5 | 58 | 53 | Granite Guardian +5 |
| Payments & pricing | 10%12.5 | 60 | 45 | Granite Guardian +15 |
| Task success | 10%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Maintenance & community | 7%8.8 | 47 | 28 | Granite Guardian +19 |
| Transparency & trust | 7%8.8 | 70 | 55 | Granite Guardian +15 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | 60.1 · C | 49.1 · D |
Facts side by side
| Fact | Granite Guardian | Llama Guard 4 |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Model API | Model API |
| Vendor | IBM | Meta |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | HTTP | HTTP |
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | Apache 2.0 for the weights and the repository | Llama 4 Community Licence (source-available weights, not an OSI licence), with the Llama 4 acceptable use policy |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | no |
| Last release | 2026-04-29 | 2025-04-29 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | 2025-04-05 |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Customer content may train models | not found in the text | |
| Terms restrict automated access | not found in the text | |
| Terms restrict benchmarking | not found in the text | |
| Terms or service can change without notice | not found in the text | |
| Arbitration or class-action waiver | not found in the text | |
| Popularity | 182 stars | 4.4k stars |
Verdicts
Granite Guardian
One ungated Apache 2.0 model judges harm, jailbreaks, RAG groundedness, function-call errors and custom criteria, with signed weights and published evaluation code. It is trained and tested on English only, each call checks one criterion, the 4.1 prompt format differs from 3.x, and IBM's watsonx.ai lists only the deprecated 3.0 model.
Llama Guard 4
A single self-hosted model classifies text and multi-image prompts against 14 MLCommons-aligned hazard categories and answers in a few tokens. The weights have not changed since 29 April 2025, download access needs Meta's manual approval, and the licence withholds the grant from individuals and companies based in the European Union.
Before you call either
Granite Guardian
- Append the
<guardian>block as the final user message, with the mode line,### Criteria:and### Scoring Schema:. Copy the strings from the model card, because no package builds them - Use the no-think instruction for gating and parse
<score>. Think mode writes a reasoning trace first, and the card's examples allow up to 2,048 output tokens - Treat
yesas the criterion being met, which for built-in criteria means the risk is present. Treat a missing<score>tag as a failed check - Pass retrieved text through
documents=and tool schemas throughavailable_tools=inapply_chat_template, not inside the message text - Under Ollama, set
num_ctxin the request options. IBM's docs say the default context is short and long requests are truncated
Llama Guard 4
- Request access on the Hugging Face page before anything else. Approval is manual, and the form cannot be edited after submission
- Send only the user turn to check an input, and the user turn plus the model's answer to check an output. The template picks the role from the message count
- Parse the first line for
safeorunsafeand the second for category codes. Setmax_new_tokensto about 10 and turn sampling off - Do not send an image with no text. Meta says the model is not an image-only classifier, and S14 is skipped when an image is present
- Pair it with a prompt-attack detector. The card says the model can itself be moved by adversarial or injected text
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, Granite Guardian or Llama Guard 4?
Granite Guardian scores 60.1 (C) on agent readiness against Llama Guard 4's 49.1 (D), and leads in every scored category.
Do Granite Guardian and Llama Guard 4 need an API key?
Neither needs a key.
Can an agent call Granite Guardian and Llama Guard 4 without installing anything?
No hosted endpoint is listed for Granite Guardian. No hosted endpoint is listed for Llama Guard 4.
Other comparisons with Granite Guardian or Llama Guard 4
- Amazon Bedrock Guardrails vs Granite Guardian
- Azure AI Content Safety (Prompt Shields) vs Granite Guardian
- Cisco AI Defense Inspection API vs Granite Guardian
- Google Cloud Model Armor vs Granite Guardian
- Granite Guardian vs LlamaFirewall
- Amazon Bedrock Guardrails vs Llama Guard 4
- Azure AI Content Safety (Prompt Shields) vs Llama Guard 4
- Cisco AI Defense Inspection API vs Llama Guard 4
- Google Cloud Model Armor vs Llama Guard 4
- Granite Guardian vs Guardrails AI
- Granite Guardian vs Lakera Guard (Check Point AI Guardrails)
- Granite Guardian vs Mistral Moderation API
- Granite Guardian vs NVIDIA NeMo Guardrails
- Granite Guardian vs OpenAI Guardrails
- Granite Guardian vs OpenAI Moderation API
- Granite Guardian vs Prisma AIRS AI Runtime Security API
- Guardrails AI vs Llama Guard 4
- Lakera Guard (Check Point AI Guardrails) vs Llama Guard 4
- Llama Guard 4 vs Mistral Moderation API
- Llama Guard 4 vs NVIDIA NeMo Guardrails
- Llama Guard 4 vs OpenAI Guardrails
- Llama Guard 4 vs OpenAI Moderation API
- Llama Guard 4 vs Prisma AIRS AI Runtime Security API
- Granite Guardian vs Presidio
- Llama Guard 4 vs Presidio
- Llama Guard 4 vs LlamaFirewall
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/granite-guardian-vs-llama-guard.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/granite-guardian.json·/api/v1/tools/llama-guard.json - From a terminal
anchor compare granite-guardian llama-guard(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "granite-guardian", "b": "llama-guard"}at/mcp, no key