HiClawvstemporal
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| HiClaw | temporal | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 67/100 | 83/100 |
| Rank in category | #32 of 209 in AI Agents | #1 of 1 in Workflow |
| GitHub stars | 5 885 | 24 039 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +222 | +779 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 15 | 11 |
| Latest release | v1.2.5 · 16 Oct 2026 | v1.30.8 · 12 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Easy | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | Apache-2.0 | MIT |
| Main language | Go | Go |
Which one should you pick?
temporal scores 83/100 against 67/100 for HiClaw, so it is the safer default.
HiClaw ships more often: 15 stable releases in the past year, against 11 for temporal.
If you want the quickest setup, HiClaw is easier to run; temporal needs more configuration.
temporal is growing faster right now (+779 stars in 30 days).
HiClaw details →temporal details →