Learn how LiteLLM and LLM Gateway differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these ai gateways is best for you.
Last 30 days
Last commit
Repository age
Version
Self-hosted
Repository

Last 30 days
Last commit
Repository age
Version
License
Self-hosted
Repository

Both LiteLLM and LLM Gateway have their unique strengths and serve similar purposes effectively. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
LiteLLM significantly outpaces LLM Gateway in community adoption with 59,829 stars compared to 1,665 stars on GitHub. This 35.9x difference suggests LiteLLM has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, LiteLLM has 11,871 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
LLM Gateway is growing faster, adding 77 stars in the last 30 days (+4.8%) against adding 2,233 stars for LiteLLM (+3.9%). LLM Gateway is the smaller project of the two, so it is closing the gap rather than extending a lead.
Both projects show recent activity, with LiteLLM last updated 21 hours ago and LLM Gateway 21 hours ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, CSS, Bash, Typescript, JSX, Next.js. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: LiteLLM uses Python.
LiteLLM has been in development longer, starting 3 years ago, compared to LLM Gateway which began 1 year ago. This 1.7-year head start suggests LiteLLM may have more mature features and established processes.
LLM Gateway is licensed under MIT, while LiteLLM's license terms are not publicly specified.
Both tools serve similar use cases in AI Gateways.
Both LiteLLM and LLM Gateway offer self-hosting capabilities, giving you full control over your data and infrastructure.