Head to head · Agent frameworks · October 2026 research run
guilds.run vs TradingAgents
TradingAgents scores 64.7 (B) on agent readiness against guilds.run's 56.5 (C), and leads in 4 of 7 scored categories. guilds.run leads on agent ergonomics and security & auth. Both do agent frameworks.
Best agent frameworks and SDKs · All 66 frameworks comparisons
Which one, for what
Best for A person or small team that wants a standing, inspectable team of agents with schedules, shared tables and a web app, run on one machine, and is comfortable tracking main.
Ahead on
- Agent ergonomics, 67 against 61
- Security & auth, 68 against 62
Also in its favour
- Free to start without a card
Watch for
No tagged release, version number, changelog or published image. Users install whatever is on main
Best for Researchers who want a fixed multi-agent analysis of one listed instrument or crypto pair on a date, with point-in-time data for backtests, and who will run Python.
Ahead on
- Reliability, 67 against 53
- Maintenance & community, 82 against 41
- Transparency & trust, 68 against 52
Watch for
No MCP client or MCP server, so an agent drives it only through Python or the CLI
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | guilds.run | TradingAgents | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reliability | 16%20 | 53 | 67 | TradingAgents +14 |
| Performance | 10%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Schema & documentation | 13%16.2 | 58 | 61 | TradingAgents +3 |
| Agent ergonomics | 13%16.2 | 67 | 61 | guilds.run +6 |
| Security & auth | 14%17.5 | 68 | 62 | guilds.run +6 |
| Payments & pricing | 10%12.5 | 60 | 60 | even |
| Task success | 10%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Maintenance & community | 7%8.8 | 41 | 82 | TradingAgents +41 |
| Transparency & trust | 7%8.8 | 52 | 68 | TradingAgents +16 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | -2 | 0 | |
| Total | C 56.5/100 | B 64.7/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | guilds.run | TradingAgents |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Agent framework | Agent framework |
| Vendor | Cigale AI | Tauric Research |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | API key | API key |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | AGPL-3.0-only | Apache-2.0 |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | no |
| Last release | none | 2026-10-16 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | |
| Customer content may train models | ||
| Terms restrict automated access | ||
| Terms restrict benchmarking | ||
| Terms or service can change without notice | ||
| Arbitration or class-action waiver | ||
| Popularity | 57 stars | 114k stars |
Verdicts
guilds.run
A self-hosted multi-agent system that records each run's prompt, tool calls and memory changes, with per-agent models and tools and no telemetry by default. Public since 9 October 2026, it has no tagged release or published package, its own security register lists 13 open issues, and the site's terms and privacy links return 404.
TradingAgents
An Apache 2.0 LangGraph framework at 0.7.0 with six releases in 90 days, a dated changelog with upgrade notes, a public test matrix and point-in-time rules for historical runs. It has no MCP client or server, no PyPI package and no documentation beyond the README, and its output is a model-written rating that places no orders.
Before you call either
guilds.run
- Keep the box on loopback or behind an authenticating proxy with AUTH_MODE=trusted-header. The default mode does not authenticate
- Put agents that hold different secrets or GitHub tokens on different machines. Agents on one machine can read each other's homes and tokens
- Back up the .env file written by ./setup.sh. It holds the only copy of the key that encrypts stored credentials
- Set a spend limit at your model provider. guilds.run sets no spend cap, and max_tool_calls defaults to 50 per run
- Pin a commit of main when you deploy. There are no tagged releases or versioned images yet
TradingAgents
- Run headless with
tradingagents --ticker <T> --date <YYYY-MM-DD> --analysts market,news,fundamentals --save --no-show; a missing answer stops the run and names the flag - Guard on the REVIEW signal before mapping
propagate()'s decision to a rating; it means no rating could be parsed - Set SEC_EDGAR_USER_AGENT to the operator's own name and address before fetching US fundamentals
- Keep provider keys out of the working directory tree unless intended, since the package loads the nearest .env on import
- Treat the rating as model output for research; the framework places no orders and its results vary between runs
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, guilds.run or TradingAgents?
TradingAgents scores 64.7 (B) on agent readiness against guilds.run's 56.5 (C), and leads in 4 of 7 scored categories. guilds.run leads on agent ergonomics and security & auth.
Are guilds.run and TradingAgents open source?
Yes. guilds.run is open source (AGPL-3.0-only). TradingAgents is open source (Apache-2.0).
Other comparisons with guilds.run or TradingAgents
- AgentOS vs guilds.run
- AgentOS vs TradingAgents
- Agno vs guilds.run
- Agno vs TradingAgents
- Claude Agent SDK vs guilds.run
- Claude Agent SDK vs TradingAgents
- CrewAI vs guilds.run
- CrewAI vs TradingAgents
- Docker Agent vs guilds.run
- Docker Agent vs TradingAgents
- Agent Development Kit (ADK) vs guilds.run
- Agent Development Kit (ADK) vs TradingAgents
- guilds.run vs LangGraph
- guilds.run vs Microsoft Agent Framework
- guilds.run vs OpenAI Agents SDK
- guilds.run vs Pydantic AI
- LangGraph vs TradingAgents
- Microsoft Agent Framework vs TradingAgents
- OpenAI Agents SDK vs TradingAgents
- Pydantic AI vs TradingAgents
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/guilds-run-vs-tradingagents.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/guilds-run.json·/api/v1/tools/tradingagents.json - From a terminal
anchor compare guilds-run tradingagents(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "guilds-run", "b": "tradingagents"}at/mcp, no key