HiClawvsOmniVoice-Studio
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| HiClaw | OmniVoice-Studio | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 67/100 | 94/100 |
| Rank in category | #32 of 209 in AI Agents | #1 of 9 in Text to Speech |
| GitHub stars | 5 885 | 92 652 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +222 | +57 711 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 15 | 35 |
| Latest release | v1.2.5 · 16 Oct 2026 | v0.5.7 · 26 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Easy | Moderate |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | Apache-2.0 | AGPL-3.0 |
| Main language | Go | Python |
Which one should you pick?
OmniVoice-Studio scores 94/100 against 67/100 for HiClaw, so it is the safer default.
OmniVoice-Studio ships more often: 35 stable releases in the past year, against 15 for HiClaw.
If you want the quickest setup, HiClaw is easier to run; OmniVoice-Studio needs more configuration.
OmniVoice-Studio is growing faster right now (+57 711 stars in 30 days).
HiClaw details →OmniVoice-Studio details →