# Orbits vs Tomo (slim)

> Orbits scores 15.6 (F) to Tomo's 13.1 (F) for assistants reached by message. Prices, MCP, x402, uptime and agent notes side by side.

- Full: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/orbits-vs-tomo.md (~3,100 tokens) · this version ~430 tokens · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/orbits-vs-tomo.json · canonical https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/orbits-vs-tomo
- Index: https://www.anchorterminal.com/llms.txt · API: https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/index.json · Updated: 2026-10-13

Orbits scores 15.6 (F) on agent readiness against Tomo's 13.1 (F), and leads in 2 of 7 scored categories. Both do assistants reached by message.

- Orbits: F 15.6, rank #997 of 1010 · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/orbits.min.md
- Tomo: F 13.1, rank #1000 of 1010 · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/tomo.min.md
- Orbits, good for Families who want one shared assistant for calendars, lists, meals, chores and household email. Ahead on Schema & documentation, 10 against 0; Payments & pricing, 20 against 10.
- Tomo, good for People who want accountability, check-ins and reminders by text, including in group chats.

| Category | Orbits | Tomo |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Reliability (16%) | 15 | 15 |
| Performance (10%) | pending | pending |
| Schema & documentation (13%) | 10 | 0 |
| Agent ergonomics (13%) | 0 | 0 |
| Security & auth (14%) | 0 | 0 |
| Payments & pricing (10%) | 20 | 10 |
| Task success (10%) | pending | pending |
| Maintenance & community (7%) | 54 | 54 |
| Transparency & trust (7%) | 43 | 47 |

| Fact (where they differ) | Orbits | Tomo |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Vendor | Nemus AI, Inc. | Mapo Labs, Inc. |
| Licence | Closed service under the Orbits Terms of Service (Nemus AI, Inc.). | Closed service under Tomo's Terms of Service (Mapo Labs, Inc., last updated 24 September 2026). |
| llms.txt | yes | no |
| Last release | 2026-10-13 | 2026-09-29 |