# IronClaw vs SafeClaw

> Side-by-side comparison of two projects in the OpenClaw ecosystem.

Canonical HTML: https://shelldex.com/compare/ironclaw-vs-safeclaw/
JSON: https://shelldex.com/api/compare/ironclaw-vs-safeclaw.json

| Field | IronClaw | SafeClaw |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Tagline | Rust-hardened privacy fortress | Zero-LLM OpenClaw alternative |
| Language | rust | python |
| Status | active | active |
| Stars | 12k | 280 |
| Forks | 1424 | 35 |
| Open issues | 925 | 2 |
| License | Apache-2.0 | MIT |
| Last commit | 2026-05-15T16:49:45Z | 2026-05-09T13:48:23Z |
| 7d growth | 106 | 2 |
| MCP support | no | no |
| Requires LLM | yes | no |
| Platforms | server | server |
| Categories | privacy, security | minimal, lightweight |
| Health score | 75/100 | 85/100 |
| Leaderboard rank | #13 | #39 |

## Key differences

- IronClaw has 44x more stars (12k vs 280), indicating significantly broader adoption.
- IronClaw is growing faster with +106 stars this week vs +2 for SafeClaw.
- IronClaw is written in Rust while SafeClaw uses Python, which may influence your choice depending on your stack.
- IronClaw uses the Apache-2.0 license while SafeClaw uses MIT.
- SafeClaw works without any API keys — zero LLM cost — while IronClaw requires an LLM provider.
- IronClaw focuses on privacy, security while SafeClaw targets minimal, lightweight.

## Descriptions

### IronClaw

Rust implementation focused on privacy and security. When your agent needs armor plating.

### SafeClaw

Rule-based and local-first assistant positioned as an OpenClaw alternative with no required LLM API spend.