Ecosystem report · 43 tracked · data as of Sep 19, 2026

State of the ecosystem.

What moved across every tracked OpenClaw alternative, how the architecture cohorts actually compare, and where the security and deployment posture sits. Numbers are computed from the same data the profiles use — no figure on this page is written by a model.

Measured · tables built at compile timeAI-written summary · Sep 13, 2026Summary written against older data

Tracked

43

projects in every table below

New stars

4,336

across 7 days

Flat

13

gained nothing in the window

Hardened

5

security ≥ 85 and shell risk ≤ 4

The short version

Five things worth knowing before you open the index. Everything below expands on them with the full tables.

  1. 01Hermes Agent led absolute gains with +2592 stars; Ouroboros grew fastest at +2.4%.
  2. 02Compiled runtimes average a security score of 76 versus 64 for scripting runtimes.
  3. 0337 projects are local-first and only 4 require cloud; 10 have unknown licenses.

What moved

Star movement, Sep 12, 2026 → Sep 19, 2026.

Measured from the daily star history for 43 of 43 tracked projects. Absolute growth favours the large repos, so the relative column is listed beside it.

13 of 43 projects gained nothing over the window.

Architecture

Three cohorts, assigned by rule.

Rules are applied in order and the first match wins, so all 43 projects land in exactly one cohort and none can appear twice. Medians are computed per cohort.

Edge & minimalist22 of 43

Single-binary runtimes small enough for a tiny VPS, an ARM board, or an always-on background process.

Rule: Memory ≤ 20 MB and boot ≤ 50 ms

Mem
11.5 MB
Boot
27.5 ms
Sec
75

+ 17 more in this cohort

Team & multi-tenant13 of 43

Heavier runtimes that carry shared workspaces, tenant separation, or channel fan-out for a group.

Rule: Multi-user declared, above the edge footprint

Mem
90 MB
Boot
220 ms
Sec
62

+ 8 more in this cohort

Full-runtime assistant8 of 43

Single-operator assistants that keep the reference feature surface and pay for it in memory and boot time.

Rule: Everything else

Mem
85 MB
Boot
215 ms
Sec
62

+ 3 more in this cohort

Security

The runtime split, in real numbers.

Averages and medians over the five security sub-scores every profile carries. Sandboxing and telemetry safety are protection axes where higher is better; shell risk runs the other way. How the axes are scored.

AI readingThe runtime split is the clearest security signal in the data. The 20 compiled-runtime projects average a security score of 76, with median sandboxing at 7 and shell risk at 5.5. The 23 scripting-runtime projects average 64, with sandboxing at 5 and shell risk at 7. Across all 43 projects only 5 count as hardened while 10 run unsupervised shells. The practical cost: choosing a scripting-runtime agent means you are more likely to need your own sandboxing layer, while compiled options more often ship containment built in. Check the shell-risk flag before deploying anything with tool access.

CohortProjectsAvg securitySandboxingShell riskTelemetry
Compiled runtimesRust, Go, Zig, C, C++, Kotlin20767 / 105.5 / 108 / 10
Scripting runtimesPython, TypeScript, JavaScript and friends23645 / 107 / 106 / 10

Median score

72 / 100

Across all 43 tracked projects

Hardened

5

Security ≥ 85 with shell risk ≤ 4

Open shell

10

Shell risk ≥ 8, largely unsupervised execution

Posture

Where the data actually runs, and under what licence.

AI readingThe ecosystem leans strongly local: 37 of 43 projects are local-first, 38 treat cloud as optional, and only 4 require it, so self-hosting is the norm rather than the exception. 19 projects declare multi-user support, which matters if you need shared deployments. Licensing is mostly permissive, with MIT covering 20 projects and Apache-2.0 another 10, but 2 use AGPL-3.0 and 1 uses GPL-3.0, which can constrain commercial or SaaS use. Notably 10 projects have unknown licenses, and shipping against an unlicensed dependency is a real legal risk worth checking before adoption.

Local-first

37 / 43

Cloud required

4 / 43

Cloud optional

38 / 43

Multi-user

19 / 43

Licences

  • MIT20
  • Apache-2.010
  • AGPL-3.02
  • GPL-3.01
  • Not published10

Runtimes by median footprint

Rust12 projects · median 15 MB
Python11 projects · median 90 MB
TypeScript9 projects · median 90 MB
Go4 projects · median 10 MB
C2 projects · median 1.5 MB
JavaScript1 project · median 80 MB
Kotlin1 project · median 250 MB
n8n Workflow (JSON)1 project · median 120 MB
Shell1 project · median 8 MB
Zig1 project · median 1 MB

20 projects run on a compiled runtime and 23 on a scripting runtime — the split that drives most of the footprint and containment difference above.

Next

The report shows the shape. The index gets you to a shortlist.

Every project named above links to its profile. Sort the full index by what you care about, then send two candidates into a side-by-side comparison.

Nominate a clone

Add a new Claw

Paste a GitHub repository and tell us why it belongs on the tracker.

Opens a prefilled issue on GitHub — every nomination is public. Comfortable with a PR? Adding the repo to projects.json is faster.