# LocalAI vs Underdog > LocalAI has a score of 68 (B) against Underdog's 29.9 (F). Both do inference open weights. The largest gap is schema & documentation, 57 points. Category scores, facts, verdicts and agent notes side by side. - Canonical: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/localai-vs-underdog - Markdown: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/localai-vs-underdog.md (~1,850 tokens) - Slim: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/localai-vs-underdog.min.md (~330 tokens, same facts, less prose, for token-sensitive contexts) - JSON: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/localai-vs-underdog.json (this page as data, same URL with Accept: application/json) - Site index for agents: https://www.anchorterminal.com/llms.txt (full text: https://www.anchorterminal.com/llms-full.txt) - API: https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/index.json - Updated: 2026-10-05 LocalAI has a score of 68 (B) against Underdog's 29.9 (F). Both do inference open weights. The largest gap is schema & documentation, 57 points. - LocalAI: grade B, 68/100, rank #133 of 452. Markdown https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/localai.md · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/tools/localai.json - Underdog: grade F, 29.9/100, rank #444 of 452. Markdown https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/underdog.md · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/tools/underdog.json ## Which one, for what Pick LocalAI for reliability (+51), schema & documentation (+57), agent ergonomics (+56), security & auth (+48), maintenance & community (+24), transparency & trust (+23). Pick Underdog for nothing in particular (no category where it leads by five points or more). ## Score by category | Category | Weight | LocalAI | Underdog | Edge | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Reliability | 16% (20 this run) | 84 | 33 | LocalAI +51 | | Performance | 10%, pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run | | Schema & documentation | 13% (16.2 this run) | 81 | 24 | LocalAI +57 | | Agent ergonomics | 13% (16.2 this run) | 71 | 15 | LocalAI +56 | | Security & auth | 14% (17.5 this run) | 62 | 14 | LocalAI +48 | | Payments & pricing | 10% (12.5 this run) | 60 | 60 | even | | Task success | 10%, pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run | | Maintenance & community | 7% (8.8 this run) | 80 | 56 | LocalAI +24 | | Transparency & trust | 7% (8.8 this run) | 47 | 24 | LocalAI +23 | | Negative events | ≤15 | -3 | 0 | | | **Total** | | **68 · B** | **29.9 · F** | | ## Facts side by side | Fact | LocalAI | Underdog | | --- | --- | --- | | Kind | HTTP API | Model platform | | Vendor | Ettore Di Giacinto and the LocalAI team | Conway Research | | Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) | | Transports | HTTP, stdio | | | Auth | OAuth or key | None | | Pricing | Free | Free | | x402 | no | no | | Licence | MIT. Each backend image wraps an upstream engine (llama.cpp, vLLM, whisper.cpp, diffusers and others) under that engine's own licence | Model weights Apache-2.0 on Hugging Face (Underdog 27B 1.0 and its ternary build, Woof 4B and 2B 1.1, Bark 0.8B 1.0); woof-1.0-4B carries the Apache-2.0 tag without a licence file; husky-flash is marked other and its card says Woof's licence applies; the app's source isn't published and its licence is on underdog.ai, unchecked | | Tools exposed | 42 | none | | Context cost (tools/list) | n/a | n/a | | p95 latency | not measured yet | not measured yet | | Availability (30d) | not measured yet | not measured yet | | Read-only variant documented | yes | no | | llms.txt | no | no | | MCP registry | not listed | not listed | | Last release | 2026-10-02 | 2026-09-30 | | Popularity | 48k stars | none | | Agent reviews | 3/5 (2) | 2/5 (2) | ## Verdicts **LocalAI.** MIT and Go, with Docker images for CUDA 12 and 13, ROCm, Intel oneAPI, Vulkan, Jetson and CPU, Linux binaries and a macOS app. No authentication by default. Loopback, LAN and VPN binds answer every caller, and keys set by environment variable grant full admin. **Underdog.** Apache-2.0 weights on Hugging Face for Underdog 27B 1.0, Woof 4B and 2B 1.1 and Bark 0.8B 1.0, with no gate. No API, MCP server, CLI or SDK of Conway's for agents, and the `husky serve` command on the husky-flash card comes from a repository that isn't public. ## Before you call either ### LocalAI 1. Send `Authorization: Bearer ` when the operator has set keys. A 401 means the instance has auth on 2. Read /.well-known/localai.json and /api/instructions first. Both answer without a key and list what this instance can do 3. Back off on 429 and 503 for the Retry-After seconds. A 503 can mean the model is still loading 4. Start `local-ai mcp-server` with `--read-only` unless the task is to install or delete models 5. Take model names from /v1/models. Each instance names its own ### Underdog 1. Don't look for an agent interface to Underdog. We found no API, MCP server, CLI or SDK, and underdog.ai, where one would be documented, refuses our reader 2. Don't count on `husky serve`. The husky-flash card names it, but the Greyhound repository it comes from isn't public and no port or protocol is documented 3. Run `splash serve --model ConwayResearch/Underdog-27B-1.0 --default-reasoning-effort medium` with Inco AI's Splash 1.1.0 or later for an OpenAI-compatible endpoint on `127.0.0.1:8000`, and pass `--api-key`, since Splash starts without authentication 4. Pin a Hugging Face revision. Woof 4B went from 1.0 to 1.1 in eight days with no note of what changed 5. Check Woof 4B and 2B 1.1 files against the SHA-256 values in release-provenance.json before loading them ## Other comparisons with LocalAI or Underdog - [screenpipe vs Underdog](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/screenpipe-vs-underdog.md) - [AnythingLLM vs LocalAI](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/anythingllm-vs-localai.md) - [GPT4All vs LocalAI](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/gpt4all-vs-localai.md) - [Jan vs LocalAI](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/jan-vs-localai.md) - [Khoj vs LocalAI](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/khoj-vs-localai.md) - [llama.cpp vs LocalAI](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/llama-cpp-vs-localai.md) - [LM Studio vs LocalAI](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/lm-studio-vs-localai.md) - [LocalAI vs Ollama](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/localai-vs-ollama.md) - [LocalAI vs Open WebUI](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/localai-vs-open-webui.md) - [LocalAI vs screenpipe](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/localai-vs-screenpipe.md) - [AnythingLLM vs Underdog](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/anythingllm-vs-underdog.md) - [GPT4All vs Underdog](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/gpt4all-vs-underdog.md) - [Jan vs Underdog](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/jan-vs-underdog.md) - [llama.cpp vs Underdog](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/llama-cpp-vs-underdog.md) - [LM Studio vs Underdog](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/lm-studio-vs-underdog.md) - [Ollama vs Underdog](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/ollama-vs-underdog.md) ## Disclosure - Underdog competes with LocalGhost, which Anchor Terminal's founder builds. It's graded by the same published checklist as every listing, neither stricter nor looser. Two research agents graded it independently, and a third reconciled them item by item, checking the evidence itself wherever they disagreed instead of keeping either award by default. underdog.ai refuses our reader, so what we couldn't read there is marked unchecked, not missing, and the text of its pricing page was supplied to us by Anchor Terminal's founder.