hermesclaw vs litellm
litellm is much bigger: 58.1k stars against 726. Over the days we have tracked them hermesclaw moved +22.2% and litellm +6.9%, so hermesclaw is growing faster right now.
They split the axes: hermesclaw leads on setup ease, litellm on model freedom.
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
Lets you run Hermes Agent, OpenClaw, and OpenCode simultaneously on a single WeChat account by acting as the sole iLink poller and proxying requests to local gateway endpoints.
- Stars
- 726
- Tracked growth
- +22.2%
- Maturity
- ●●●●●
- Last commit
- 11d ago
- Language
- Python
- License
- MIT
- Cost to run
- Free, self-hosted (no paid cloud required)
A lightweight, production-ready self-hosted AI gateway that unifies 100+ LLM providers into a single OpenAI-compatible API with virtual keys, spend tracking, guardrails, and load balancing.
- Stars
- 58.1k
- Tracked growth
- +6.9%
- Maturity
- ●●●●●
- Last commit
- 12m ago
- Language
- Python
- License
- NOASSERTION
- Cost to run
- Self-hosted — your API keys (pay providers)
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 | hermesclaw | litellm |
|---|---|---|
Context depth How much of your codebase it sees before it answers: the open diff, the diff plus related files, or the whole repository. | ●●●●● Diff only | ●●●●● No repo context |
Noise control How it keeps output volume down — severity thresholds, deduplication, incremental runs over new commits only. | ●●●●● Routing + tags | ●●●●● Basic guardrails |
Customization How far it bends to your team: custom rules, prompts, style guides, per-path config. | ●●●●● Config file options | ●●●●● Configurable |
Privacy Whether your code stays on your own infrastructure: fully local, self-hostable, or cloud API only. | ●●●●● Self-hostable | ●●●●● Self-hostable |
Model freedom Whether you can point it at any provider, or it is wired to one. | ●●●●● Gateway-managed models | ●●●●● Bring-your-own-key |
Setup ease What it takes to get a first useful run out of it. | ●●●●● One-command install | ●●●●● Config + API key |
Which one to pick
Pick hermesclaw if…
Easy setup — one-command installer configures local proxies, patches gateways, and installs a background service so multiple WeChat agents can run on the same account.
- Setup ease: One-command install (5/5 against 3/5)
Pick litellm if…
Unified multi-provider support — use one OpenAI-compatible API to call 100+ LLMs with a self-hosted gateway, virtual keys, and cost tracking.
- Model freedom: Bring-your-own-key (5/5 against 3/5)
What people want from each one
AaronWong1999/hermesclaw
BerriAI/litellm
Questions people ask
Is hermesclaw better than litellm?
They split the axes: hermesclaw leads on setup ease, litellm on model freedom. hermesclaw is worth picking when easy setup — one-command installer configures local proxies, patches gateways, and installs a background service so multiple WeChat agents can run on the same account.
Which of hermesclaw and litellm keeps my code private?
hermesclaw: Self-hostable (4/5). litellm: Self-hostable (4/5).
What does each one cost to run?
hermesclaw: Free, self-hosted (no paid cloud required). litellm: Self-hosted — your API keys (pay providers).
Full profiles: AaronWong1999/hermesclaw and BerriAI/litellm. Everything else in Gateways & routing.