# HiClaw vs llama.cpp

> Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.

| | HiClaw | llama.cpp |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 67/100 | 93/100 ✓ |
| Rank in category | #32 of 209 in AI Agents | #2 of 25 in LLM Inference |
| GitHub stars | 5 886 | 132 674 ✓ |
| Stars, last 30 days | +223 | +3 317 ✓ |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 15 | 1461 ✓ |
| Latest release | v1.2.5 · 16 Oct 2026 | b11972 · 28 Oct 2026 ✓ |
| Setup | Easy ✓ | Moderate |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | Apache-2.0 | MIT |
| Main language | Go | C++ |

## Which one should you pick?

llama.cpp scores 93/100 against 67/100 for HiClaw, so it is the safer default.

llama.cpp ships more often: 1461 stable releases in the past year, against 15 for HiClaw.

If you want the quickest setup, HiClaw is easier to run; llama.cpp needs more configuration.

llama.cpp is growing faster right now (+3 317 stars in 30 days).

## Details

- [HiClaw](https://selfhost.directory/project/hiclaw) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/hiclaw.md)
- [llama.cpp](https://selfhost.directory/project/llamacpp) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/llamacpp.md)

---
Source: https://selfhost.directory/compare/hiclaw-vs-llamacpp