Head to head · Assistant proactive · October 2026 research run
OpenClaw vs ZeroClaw
ZeroClaw scores 70.2 (BB) on agent readiness against OpenClaw's 67.1 (B), and leads in 1 of 7 scored categories. OpenClaw leads on agent ergonomics and maintenance & community. Both do assistant proactive.
Best AI personal assistants that act for one person · All 190 assistants comparisons
Which one, for what
OpenClaw B
Best 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
- Agent ergonomics, 77 against 72
- Maintenance & community, 86 against 80
Watch for
Without configuration the default is full access. Host exec runs with no approval and sandboxing is off
ZeroClaw BB
Best for One person who wants an assistant on their own hardware that answers on Telegram, Discord, Matrix or email, asks before it writes or runs commands, and works with a local model.
Also in its favour
- Agent-ready, a grade of BB or better
- No key needed to call it
- Free to start without a card
Watch for
The docs state that command execution is not audited. [security.audit] records certificate events only, and tool receipts are opt-in and not durable
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | OpenClaw | ZeroClaw | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reliability | 16%20 | 75 | 74 | OpenClaw +1 |
| Performance | 10%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Schema & documentation | 13%16.2 | 84 | 82 | OpenClaw +2 |
| Agent ergonomics | 13%16.2 | 77 | 72 | OpenClaw +5 |
| Security & auth | 14%17.5 | 74 | 76 | ZeroClaw +2 |
| Payments & pricing | 10%12.5 | 60 | 60 | even |
| Task success | 10%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Maintenance & community | 7%8.8 | 86 | 80 | OpenClaw +6 |
| Transparency & trust | 7%8.8 | 68 | 64 | OpenClaw +4 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | -8 | -3 | |
| Total | B 67.1/100 | BB 70.2/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | OpenClaw | ZeroClaw |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Agent harness | Agent harness |
| Vendor | OpenClaw Foundation | ZeroClaw Labs |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | OAuth or key | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | MIT | MIT OR Apache-2.0 |
| Read-only variant documented | yes | yes |
| llms.txt | yes | yes |
| Last release | 2026-10-12 | 2026-09-05 |
| 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 | 392k stars | 33k stars |
Verdicts
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.
ZeroClaw
Supervised autonomy is the default, so tools outside a short read-only list wait for the owner's approval, and secrets are encrypted in the config file. The docs state that command execution is not written to an audit log, and the project publishes no privacy policy or terms.
Before you call either
OpenClaw
- Set a session permission mode of
guardedorworkspace, ortools.exec.mode, before connecting mail. The default runs host commands without approval - Turn on
agents.defaults.sandboxfor any agent that reads mail, web pages or attachments. Sandboxing is off by default - Set
tools.message.crossContext.allowAcrossProvidersandallowWithinProvidertofalseto confine sends to the current conversation - Route incoming mail to a restricted reader agent, as the IMAP and Gmail guides show, and deny
gateway,cron,sessions_spawnandsessions_sendfor it - Run
openclaw security auditafter setup, and treat the Gateway token as an owner credential.POST /tools/invokeaccepts it with full operator access
ZeroClaw
- Keep
[risk_profiles.<alias>] level = "supervised".fullruns every tool not listed inalways_ask, and the YOLO preset removes the sandbox and path rules too - Add sending and account tools such as
send_via,google_workspaceandhttp_requesttoalways_askso a session-level Always grant cannot skip the prompt - List senders in
[peer_groups.<name>] external_peers.["*"]accepts anyone on that channel - Set
[web_fetch].allowed_domainsand[http_request].allowed_domains. Fetches run unprompted and the OS sandbox does not block egress - Run one-shot tasks with
zeroclaw agent -a <alias> -m "<task>". A cron or webhook turn has no prompt, so shell calls fall to the command policy
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, OpenClaw or ZeroClaw?
ZeroClaw scores 70.2 (BB) on agent readiness against OpenClaw's 67.1 (B), and leads in 1 of 7 scored categories. OpenClaw leads on agent ergonomics and maintenance & community.
Are OpenClaw and ZeroClaw open source?
Yes. OpenClaw is open source (MIT). ZeroClaw is open source (MIT OR Apache-2.0).
Other comparisons with OpenClaw or ZeroClaw
- AstrBot vs OpenClaw
- AstrBot vs ZeroClaw
- CowAgent vs OpenClaw
- CowAgent vs ZeroClaw
- GAIA vs OpenClaw
- GAIA vs ZeroClaw
- Gemini Spark vs OpenClaw
- Gemini Spark vs ZeroClaw
- Grok Bot vs OpenClaw
- Grok Bot vs ZeroClaw
- Haven vs OpenClaw
- Haven vs ZeroClaw
- Hermes Agent vs OpenClaw
- Hermes Agent vs ZeroClaw
- Instinct vs OpenClaw
- Instinct vs ZeroClaw
- IronClaw vs OpenClaw
- IronClaw vs ZeroClaw
- Leon vs OpenClaw
- Leon vs ZeroClaw
- Lindy vs OpenClaw
- Lindy vs ZeroClaw
- nanobot vs OpenClaw
- nanobot vs ZeroClaw
- NanoClaw vs OpenClaw
- NanoClaw vs ZeroClaw
- Dots vs OpenClaw
- Dots vs ZeroClaw
- OpenClaw vs PicoClaw
- OpenClaw vs Poke
- OpenClaw vs QwenPaw
- OpenClaw vs Zo Computer
- PicoClaw vs ZeroClaw
- Poke vs ZeroClaw
- QwenPaw vs ZeroClaw
- ZeroClaw vs Zo Computer
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/openclaw-vs-zeroclaw.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/openclaw.json·/api/v1/tools/zeroclaw.json - From a terminal
anchor compare openclaw zeroclaw(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "openclaw", "b": "zeroclaw"}at/mcp, no key