ECC vs ruflo
ECC is much bigger: 249.0k stars against 70.5k. Over the days we have tracked them ECC moved +8.1% and ruflo +9.1%, so ruflo is growing faster right now.
ruflo leads on setup ease. ECC does not take any axis by a clear margin.
Stars and commit dates come from our own daily tracking. The six axes are read off each project's documentation by our review pipeline, so they describe what a project says about itself, not what we measured in its code.
Where they stand today
A harness-native, cross-harness agent operating system that bundles skills, session/state memory, verification loops, and AgentShield for production multi-harness workflows.
- Stars
- 249.0k
- Tracked growth
- +8.1%
- Maturity
- ●●●●●
- Last commit
- 16h ago
- Language
- JavaScript
- License
- MIT
- Cost to run
- Free OSS; optional Pro GitHub App ($19/seat/mo) + your model/API costs
A production-ready agent meta-harness that orchestrates self-learning multi-agent swarms with zero-trust federation, a plugin marketplace, and self-hostable local-model support.
- Stars
- 70.5k
- Tracked growth
- +9.1%
- Maturity
- ●●●●●
- Last commit
- 4h ago
- Language
- TypeScript
- License
- MIT
- Cost to run
- Your API key for cloud models; self-hostable option
Six axes, head to head
Each axis runs 0 to 5. The label under a score is what that project's own docs claim, not a category average.
| Axis | ECC | ruflo |
|---|---|---|
Context depth How much of your codebase it sees before it answers: the open diff, the diff plus related files, or the whole repository. | ●●●●● Whole-repo analysis | ●●●●● Whole-repo analysis |
Noise control How it keeps output volume down — severity thresholds, deduplication, incremental runs over new commits only. | ●●●●● Severity gating | ●●●●● Severity gating |
Customization How far it bends to your team: custom rules, prompts, style guides, per-path config. | ●●●●● Extensive configs | ●●●●● Plugins & configs |
Privacy Whether your code stays on your own infrastructure: fully local, self-hostable, or cloud API only. | ●●●●● Fully local | ●●●●● Fully local possible |
Model freedom Whether you can point it at any provider, or it is wired to one. | ●●●●● Bring-your-own-key | ●●●●● Bring-your-own / local |
Setup ease What it takes to get a first useful run out of it. | ●●●●● Config + API key | ●●●●● One-command init |
Which one to pick
Pick ECC if…
Production-ready — pick ECC when you need a self-hostable, operator-grade agent harness with built-in skills, memory, verification, and a GitHub App for PR audits.
Pick ruflo if…
Multi-model & self-hostable — pick Ruflo when you need a production-grade, extensible agent meta-harness with federated agents, local LLM support, and many built-in plugins and safety guardrails.
- Setup ease: One-command init (5/5 against 3/5)
What people want from each one
affaan-m/ECC
ruvnet/ruflo
Hacker News: Is any one using ruflo? drew 1 points and 1 comments.
Questions people ask
Is ECC better than ruflo?
ruflo leads on setup ease. ECC does not take any axis by a clear margin. ECC is worth picking when production-ready — pick ECC when you need a self-hostable, operator-grade agent harness with built-in skills, memory, verification, and a GitHub App for PR audits.
Which of ECC and ruflo keeps my code private?
ECC: Fully local (5/5). ruflo: Fully local possible (5/5).
What does each one cost to run?
ECC: Free OSS; optional Pro GitHub App ($19/seat/mo) + your model/API costs. ruflo: Your API key for cloud models; self-hostable option.
Full profiles: affaan-m/ECC and ruvnet/ruflo. Everything else in Multi-agent orchestration.