DeepSeek HarnessvsHiClaw
Two self-hosted AI Agents projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| DeepSeek Harness | HiClaw | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 87/100 | 67/100 |
| Rank in category | #3 of 209 in AI Agents | #32 of 209 in AI Agents |
| GitHub stars | 264 377 | 5 885 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +8 385 | +222 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 0 | 15 |
| Latest release | — | v1.2.5 · 16 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Easy |
| Official Docker image | No | Yes |
| License | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| Main language | Typescript | Go |
Which one should you pick?
DeepSeek Harness scores 87/100 against 67/100 for HiClaw, so it is the safer default.
HiClaw ships more often: 15 stable releases in the past year, against 0 for DeepSeek Harness.
If you want the quickest setup, HiClaw is easier to run; DeepSeek Harness needs more configuration.
DeepSeek Harness is growing faster right now (+8 385 stars in 30 days).
DeepSeek Harness details →HiClaw details →All AI Agents projects →