# nanobot vs OpenClaw

> OpenClaw scores 67.1 (B) to nanobot's 62.4 (B) for assistant proactive. Prices, MCP, x402, uptime and agent notes side by side.

- Canonical: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/nanobot-vs-openclaw
- Markdown: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/nanobot-vs-openclaw.md (~2,500 tokens)
- Slim: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/nanobot-vs-openclaw.min.md (~480 tokens, same facts, less prose, for token-sensitive contexts)
- JSON: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/nanobot-vs-openclaw.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: 2026-10-12

OpenClaw scores 67.1 (B) on agent readiness against nanobot's 62.4 (B), and leads in 6 of 7 scored categories. Both do assistant proactive.

- nanobot: grade B, 62.4/100, rank #446 of 986. Markdown https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/nanobot.md · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/tools/nanobot.json
- OpenClaw: grade B, 67.1/100, rank #270 of 986. Markdown https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/openclaw.md · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/tools/openclaw.json
- Best AI personal assistants that act for one person: https://www.anchorterminal.com/best/personal-assistants/index.md
- All 190 assistants comparisons: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/personal-assistants/index.md

## Which one, for what

### nanobot (B)

Good for: A technical owner who wants an assistant on their own machine across many chat apps, with file-based memory and a free choice of model.

Also in its favour:
- No key needed to call it

Watch for: No per-action approval was found in the docs or source. The agent sends messages, runs shell commands and edits files without asking

### OpenClaw (B)

Good for: A technical owner who wants an assistant on their own machine across many chat apps, with their choice of model and files they can read and delete.

Ahead on:
- Reliability, 75 against 70
- Schema & documentation, 84 against 77
- Security & auth, 74 against 63
- Transparency & trust, 68 against 48

Watch for: Without configuration the default is full access. Host exec runs with no approval and sandboxing is off


## Score by category

| Category | Weight | nanobot | OpenClaw | Edge |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Reliability | 16% (20 this run) | 70 | 75 | OpenClaw +5 |
| Performance | 10%, pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Schema & documentation | 13% (16.2 this run) | 77 | 84 | OpenClaw +7 |
| Agent ergonomics | 13% (16.2 this run) | 74 | 77 | OpenClaw +3 |
| Security & auth | 14% (17.5 this run) | 63 | 74 | OpenClaw +11 |
| 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) | 82 | 86 | OpenClaw +4 |
| Transparency & trust | 7% (8.8 this run) | 48 | 68 | OpenClaw +20 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | -6 | -8 | |
| **Total** | | **62.4 · B** | **67.1 · B** | |

## Facts side by side

| Fact | nanobot | OpenClaw |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Kind | Agent harness | Agent harness |
| Vendor | HKUDS | OpenClaw Foundation |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports |  |  |
| Auth | None | OAuth or key |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | MIT | MIT |
| Read-only variant documented | no | yes |
| llms.txt | yes | yes |
| Last release | 2026-09-15 | 2026-10-12 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | 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 | 49k stars | 392k stars |

## Verdicts

**nanobot.** nanobot runs on the owner's machine under the MIT licence, with no telemetry found in its source and memory kept as files the owner can read and restore. No per-action approval step was found, and the shell sandbox and workspace restriction are off by default. Five security advisories were published between March and September 2026, all with fixes.

**OpenClaw.** Self-hosted under the MIT licence, with state, memory and credentials kept on the owner's machine and no paid tier. A fresh install runs tools on the host with full access, no approval prompt and no sandbox, and the project has published 722 security advisories since January 2026, 14 of them critical.

## Before you call either

### nanobot

1. Set `tools.restrictToWorkspace` to true and `tools.exec.sandbox` to `bwrap` or `seatbelt` before giving it real accounts. Both are off by default
2. Run 0.3.0 or later. Earlier versions carry the published SSRF flaw in web fetch (GHSA-vc5v-6vwm-wf9m)
3. Keep `allowFrom` narrow on every channel and never set `["*"]` on Email, which has no pairing
4. Write secrets as `${VAR}` references in `~/.nanobot/config.json`. Plain values are stored in clear text
5. Use `nanobot -m "..."` for a one-shot run, and keep `nanobot gateway` running for channels, schedules and heartbeat

### OpenClaw

1. Set a session permission mode of `guarded` or `workspace`, or `tools.exec.mode`, before connecting mail. The default runs host commands without approval
2. Turn on `agents.defaults.sandbox` for any agent that reads mail, web pages or attachments. Sandboxing is off by default
3. Set `tools.message.crossContext.allowAcrossProviders` and `allowWithinProvider` to `false` to confine sends to the current conversation
4. Route incoming mail to a restricted reader agent, as the IMAP and Gmail guides show, and deny `gateway`, `cron`, `sessions_spawn` and `sessions_send` for it
5. Run `openclaw security audit` after setup, and treat the Gateway token as an owner credential. `POST /tools/invoke` accepts it with full operator access

## Questions

### Which is better for AI agents, nanobot or OpenClaw?

OpenClaw scores 67.1 (B) on agent readiness against nanobot's 62.4 (B), and leads in 6 of 7 scored categories.

### Are nanobot and OpenClaw open source?

Yes. nanobot is open source (MIT). OpenClaw is open source (MIT).


## For agents

- This comparison as JSON: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/nanobot-vs-openclaw.json, and with the fewest tokens: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/nanobot-vs-openclaw.min.md
- Over MCP at https://www.anchorterminal.com/mcp (no key): `compare_tools {"a": "nanobot", "b": "openclaw"}`. From a terminal: `anchor compare nanobot openclaw`
- Each listing in full: https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/tools/nanobot.json and https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/tools/openclaw.json

## Other comparisons with nanobot or OpenClaw

- [AstrBot vs nanobot](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/astrbot-vs-nanobot.md)
- [AstrBot vs OpenClaw](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/astrbot-vs-openclaw.md)
- [CowAgent vs nanobot](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/cowagent-vs-nanobot.md)
- [CowAgent vs OpenClaw](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/cowagent-vs-openclaw.md)
- [GAIA vs nanobot](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/gaia-vs-nanobot.md)
- [GAIA vs OpenClaw](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/gaia-vs-openclaw.md)
- [Gemini Spark vs nanobot](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/gemini-spark-vs-nanobot.md)
- [Gemini Spark vs OpenClaw](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/gemini-spark-vs-openclaw.md)
- [Grok Bot vs nanobot](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/grok-bot-vs-nanobot.md)
- [Grok Bot vs OpenClaw](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/grok-bot-vs-openclaw.md)
- [Haven vs nanobot](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/haven-vs-nanobot.md)
- [Haven vs OpenClaw](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/haven-vs-openclaw.md)
- [Hermes Agent vs nanobot](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/hermes-agent-vs-nanobot.md)
- [Hermes Agent vs OpenClaw](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/hermes-agent-vs-openclaw.md)
- [Instinct vs nanobot](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/instinct-vs-nanobot.md)
- [Instinct vs OpenClaw](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/instinct-vs-openclaw.md)
- [IronClaw vs nanobot](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/ironclaw-vs-nanobot.md)
- [IronClaw vs OpenClaw](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/ironclaw-vs-openclaw.md)
- [Leon vs nanobot](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/leon-vs-nanobot.md)
- [Leon vs OpenClaw](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/leon-vs-openclaw.md)
- [Lindy vs nanobot](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/lindy-vs-nanobot.md)
- [Lindy vs OpenClaw](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/lindy-vs-openclaw.md)
- [nanobot vs NanoClaw](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/nanobot-vs-nanoclaw.md)
- [nanobot vs Dots](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/nanobot-vs-openai-dots.md)
- [nanobot vs PicoClaw](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/nanobot-vs-picoclaw.md)
- [nanobot vs Poke](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/nanobot-vs-poke.md)
- [nanobot vs QwenPaw](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/nanobot-vs-qwenpaw.md)
- [nanobot vs ZeroClaw](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/nanobot-vs-zeroclaw.md)
- [nanobot vs Zo Computer](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/nanobot-vs-zo-computer.md)
- [NanoClaw vs OpenClaw](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/nanoclaw-vs-openclaw.md)
- [Dots vs OpenClaw](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/openai-dots-vs-openclaw.md)
- [OpenClaw vs PicoClaw](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/openclaw-vs-picoclaw.md)
- [OpenClaw vs Poke](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/openclaw-vs-poke.md)
- [OpenClaw vs QwenPaw](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/openclaw-vs-qwenpaw.md)
- [OpenClaw vs ZeroClaw](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/openclaw-vs-zeroclaw.md)
- [OpenClaw vs Zo Computer](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/openclaw-vs-zo-computer.md)