Learn how Agno and Laminar differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these llm application frameworks is best for you.
Stars
Forks
Last commit
Repository age
License
Auto-fetched .

Stars
Forks
Last commit
Repository age
License
Self-hosted
Auto-fetched .

Both Agno and Laminar have their unique strengths and serve similar purposes effectively. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Agno significantly outpaces Laminar in community adoption with 39,669 stars compared to 2,802 stars on GitHub. This 14.2x difference suggests Agno has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, Agno has 5,297 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
Both projects show recent activity, with Agno last updated 4 hours ago and Laminar 3 hours ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with Python. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Agno uses Bash while Laminar leverages JavaScript, CSS, Typescript, JSX, Next.js, Rust.
Agno has been in development longer, starting 4 years ago, compared to Laminar which began 2 years ago. This 2.4-year head start suggests Agno may have more mature features and established processes.
Both projects use the Apache-2.0 license, providing identical terms for usage and distribution.
Both tools serve similar use cases in LLM Application Frameworks. However, they also have distinct specializations: Agno also focuses on AI Agent Platforms while Laminar extends into Data Platforms for AI.
Laminar provides self-hosting options for complete data control and customization, while Agno may be primarily cloud-based or require different deployment approaches.