Skip to main content
OpenFang is built for performance. All benchmarks are measured from official documentation and public repositories, collected in February 2026.

Performance Metrics

OpenFang delivers exceptional performance across all critical metrics:

Cold Start Time

180ms - Fast enough for serverless deployments

Memory Footprint

40 MB idle - Efficient resource usage

Install Size

32 MB - Single binary, no dependencies

Security Systems

16 layers - Defense in depth

Cold Start Time

Lower is better. OpenFang starts in under 200ms.
ZeroClaw   ██░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░   10 ms
OpenFang   ██████░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░  180 ms    ★
LangGraph  █████████████████░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░  2.5 sec
CrewAI     ████████████████████░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░  3.0 sec
AutoGen    ██████████████████████████░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░  4.0 sec
OpenClaw   █████████████████████████████████████████░░  5.98 sec
OpenFang’s Rust architecture enables near-instant startup, making it ideal for serverless and edge deployments.

Idle Memory Usage

Lower is better. OpenFang uses only 40 MB at idle.
ZeroClaw   █░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░    5 MB
OpenFang   ████░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░   40 MB    ★
LangGraph  ██████████████████░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░  180 MB
CrewAI     ████████████████████░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░  200 MB
AutoGen    █████████████████████████░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░  250 MB
OpenClaw   ████████████████████████████████████████░░░░  394 MB
Memory efficiency means you can run more agents simultaneously on the same hardware.

Install Size

Lower is better. OpenFang ships as a single 32 MB binary.
ZeroClaw   █░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░  8.8 MB
OpenFang   ███░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░   32 MB    ★
CrewAI     ████████░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░  100 MB
LangGraph  ████████████░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░  150 MB
AutoGen    ████████████████░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░  200 MB
OpenClaw   ████████████████████████████████████████░░░░  500 MB
One binary means one install, one command, your agents are live. No Python environments, no npm packages, no Docker layers.

Security Systems

Higher is better. OpenFang implements 16 independent security layers.
OpenFang   ████████████████████████████████████████████   16      ★
ZeroClaw   ███████████████░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░    6
OpenClaw   ████████░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░    3
AutoGen    █████░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░    2
LangGraph  █████░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░    2
CrewAI     ███░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░    1
Security isn’t optional for production agents. OpenFang’s defense-in-depth approach ensures every layer is independently testable.

Channel Adapters

Higher is better. OpenFang supports 40 messaging platforms out of the box.
OpenFang   ████████████████████████████████████████████   40      ★
ZeroClaw   ███████████████░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░   15
OpenClaw   █████████████░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░   13
CrewAI     ░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░    0
AutoGen    ░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░    0
LangGraph  ░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░    0

LLM Providers

Higher is better. OpenFang supports 27 LLM providers with 123+ models.
ZeroClaw   ████████████████████████████████████████████   28
OpenFang   ██████████████████████████████████████████░░   27      ★
LangGraph  ██████████████████████░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░   15
CrewAI     ██████████████░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░   10
OpenClaw   ██████████████░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░   10
AutoGen    ███████████░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░    8

Feature Comparison

| Feature | OpenFang | OpenClaw | ZeroClaw | CrewAI | AutoGen | LangGraph | |---------|----------|----------|----------|--------|---------|-----------|| | Language | Rust | TypeScript | Rust | Python | Python | Python | | Autonomous Hands | 7 built-in | None | None | None | None | None | | Security Layers | 16 discrete | 3 basic | 6 layers | 1 basic | Docker | AES enc. | | Agent Sandbox | WASM dual-metered | None | Allowlists | None | Docker | None | | Channel Adapters | 40 | 13 | 15 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | Built-in Tools | 53 + MCP + A2A | 50+ | 12 | Plugins | MCP | LC tools | | Memory | SQLite + vector | File-based | SQLite FTS5 | 4-layer | External | Checkpoints | | Desktop App | Tauri 2.0 | None | None | None | Studio | None | | Audit Trail | Merkle hash-chain | Logs | Logs | Tracing | Logs | Checkpoints | | Cold Start | <200ms | ~6s | ~10ms | ~3s | ~4s | ~2.5s | | Install Size | ~32 MB | ~500 MB | ~8.8 MB | ~100 MB | ~200 MB | ~150 MB | | License | MIT | MIT | MIT | MIT | Apache 2.0 | MIT |

System Requirements

  • RAM: 128 MB
  • Disk: 50 MB (binary only)
  • CPU: Any x86_64/ARM64
  • OS: Linux, macOS, or Windows

Production Statistics

Lines of Code

137,728 across 14 crates

Test Coverage

1,767+ tests, all passing

Code Quality

Zero clippy warnings

Why Rust?

OpenFang is built in Rust for three critical reasons:
  1. Performance: Native compilation, zero-cost abstractions, and minimal runtime overhead
  2. Safety: Memory safety without garbage collection, preventing entire classes of bugs
  3. Reliability: Strong type system and exhaustive pattern matching catch errors at compile time
The performance gap between OpenFang and Python-based frameworks isn’t just about benchmarks - it’s about being able to run production agents on constrained hardware, respond instantly to events, and scale efficiently.

Methodology

All benchmarks were collected from official documentation and public repositories in February 2026. Performance measurements use:
  • Cold start: Time from process launch to first API response
  • Idle memory: RSS memory usage with daemon running, no active agents
  • Install size: Total disk space after installation
  • Security systems: Count of discrete, independently testable security mechanisms
  • Channel adapters: Number of built-in messaging platform integrations
  • LLM providers: Number of supported LLM API providers
For questions about methodology or to report inaccuracies, please open an issue.