gbrain
referenceGarry Tan's (YC) Markdown-first, self-wiring agent memory: a Git repo as system-of-record, embedded Postgres+pgvector, a deterministic typed knowledge graph with query-time multi-hop — the most prominent direct ctx competitor.
https://github.com/garrytan/gbraingbrain ("Search gives you raw pages. GBrain gives you the answer.") is an open-source memory/knowledge layer for LLM agents by Garry Tan (President/CEO of Y Combinator), MIT-licensed, written in TypeScript/Bun. Knowledge lives as Markdown in a Git repo (the system-of-record), which is mirrored into Postgres+pgvector for hybrid retrieval; locally this runs as embedded PGLite (Postgres 17 via WASM, zero-config). On top of that, a typed knowledge graph is "self-wired" via zero-LLM pattern matching on wikilinks, which an agent reads, writes, and traverses. Target audience: primarily individuals/power users (Tan's own production brain: 146k+ pages, 24k people, 66 cron jobs), but it scales up to teams/small enterprises via company-brain federation. Massive adoption (~23k GitHub stars as of June 2026).
- Version (June 2026)
- v0.42.51.0 (2026-06-17, VERSION file); ~331 commits on master; the vectorize.io review covered v0.30 (May 2026, pre-1.0, frequent breaking changes)
- Author / License
- Garry Tan (YC President & CEO) / MIT, TypeScript-Bun
- GitHub traction
- ~23.2k stars, ~3.3k forks (June 2026); ~5k stars in the first 24h after the 2026-04-05 release
- Storage / System-of-Record
- Git Markdown repo = SoR; mirrored to Postgres. Local: PGLite (PG17 via WASM, zero-config, up to ~50k pages). Shared/large: external Postgres/Supabase + pgvector
- Retrieval
- Hybrid: pgvector HNSW (cosine) + BM25/Postgres FTS + RRF (k=60) + source-tier/backlink boost + intent-aware query rewriting; 3 modes conservative/balanced/tokenmax; optional Haiku query expansion (2 phrasings); 4-layer dedup
- Embeddings / Reranker
- Default ZeroEntropy (hosted, OpenAI fallback, ~16 provider recipes); reranker defaults to ZeroEntropy zerank-2 (tokenmax). Fully local possible via llama-server / Qwen3-Reranker
- Knowledge graph
- Zero-LLM regex/pattern matching on wikilinks at every page write; typed edges (attended/works_at/invested_in/founded/advises/mentions). Multi-hop traversal at query time via graph-query (v0.42.34.0, 2026-06-07): deterministic, depth/fan-out-bounded, answers relationship questions even when no single page names both sides; 75%+ recall@10, +31.4 P@5 over vector-only
- Temporal
- recency + valid_until + last-updated metadata + soft-delete history; NO cyclic/Gaussian phase model, temporal reasoning not first-class per the review
- Multi-tenancy / Auth
- login-scoped slices, OAuth 2.1 + PKCE + DCR-style client registration, scope-gated read/write/admin, rate limiting, /admin dashboard; company-brain federation with source-based routing + (v0.42.46) end-to-end federated read-scope enforcement. The design center remains single-operator
- Interfaces / Scope
- 30+ MCP tools (stdio+HTTP) + 43 curated Skills (1 skillpack); schema packs SHIPPED (gbrain-base-v2 15-type, legacy 24-type); clients: Claude Code (1 command: claude mcp add gbrain -- gbrain serve), Codex, Cursor, Claude Desktop/Cowork, Perplexity, ChatGPT
- Scheduling / Jobs
- Postgres-native BullMQ-shaped job queue ('Minions'), durable subagents (two-phase pending->done, crash-survivable), configurable cron (Tan's brain: 66 jobs). New: --pace throttling, spend.posture cost control, push-based volunteer_context / gbrain watch (ambient retrieval reflex)
- Eval
- PUBLIC: LongMemEval (R@5 97.6%) + its own BrainBench (240-page Opus corpus: P@5 49.1%, R@5 97.9%, +31.4 P@5 from the graph), NamedThingBench, documented search-mode methodology
- Cost
- MIT free; an active personal brain runs at 'single-digit dollars/month' (OpenAI embeddings ~$0.10/M tokens, optional Anthropic expansion). Fully local is possible, but the default path uses hosted ZeroEntropy/OpenAI
Strengths- Deterministic typed multi-hop graph traversal at query time (graph-query): answers relational cross-entity questions where no single page names both sides — 75%+ recall@10, +31.4 P@5 vs vector-only (since 2026-06-07)
- Git Markdown as system-of-record: portable, diffable, versioned, no DB lock-in; the DB is only a retrieval mirror
- Public, reproducible eval suite (LongMemEval + BrainBench + NamedThingBench) with documented methodology
- Zero-config onboarding via PGLite (embedded PG17/WASM) — no server, Claude Code integration in a single command
- Broad interfaces: 30+ MCP tools, 43 Skills, many clients (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, ChatGPT, Perplexity); schema packs SHIPPED as policy-as-data
- Enormous community/mindshare (~23k stars, YC reach, hackathons), fast release cadence (daily), production-proven at 146k+ pages
- Push-based ambient retrieval (volunteer_context / gbrain watch) delivers context proactively per conversation turn
- Zero-LLM graph construction: cheap, deterministic, no GPU/inference cost for linking
ctx +- LLM-inferred LATENT links (5 types: topical/factual/causal/recurrent/supersedes) discover non-explicit relationships — gbrain's graph only knows explicitly set wikilinks/regex matches (no link set = no edge)
- Cyclic Temporal Gravity (7 cyclic dimensions, Gaussian decay, Temporal Gravity table) — gbrain only has recency/valid_until, temporal reasoning is not first-class
- Genuine end-to-end all-local / $0 running cost as a default identity (llama.cpp on-prem) — gbrain's default path uses hosted ZeroEntropy/OpenAI (local only as an alternative)
- Hybrid fusion + graph + temporal + scope isolation in ONE Postgres transaction over the same tables, no network hop; gbrain mirrors Git->Postgres and calls external services for default embeddings/reranker
- Cross-tenant/cross-LLM memory bridge as an explicit design center (a shared knowledge layer across multiple Anthropic tenants) — gbrain is single-operator-centric, multi-operator only via federation/custom work
- Single Go binary (CLI+daemon) without a Bun/Node runtime; pre-commit/eval/state verification discipline
- MPL-2.0 (copyleft protection for derived files) vs gbrain's permissive MIT — an advantage or disadvantage depending on perspective
- Guard (async HNSW duplicate detection, 0.98 auto-archive / 0.92 flag via LISTEN/NOTIFY) as a dedicated dedup subsystem
them +- Public benchmark (LongMemEval) — ctx evaluates endogenously (its own eval.sh, frozen baseline), with no external yardstick: remains a ctx weakness (GAP-D)
- Git Markdown system-of-record (portable/diffable/versioned) — ctx keeps knowledge exclusively in the Postgres store
- Deterministic relational multi-hop walks that answer cross-entity questions without a shared page — ctx' GraphExpand is a post-RRF boost/injection (1-hop default, fail-open, reranker as arbiter), not a relational walk that constructs an actual answer
- Significantly larger ecosystem & mindshare (~23k stars vs ctx's 434 blocks/small repo), YC distribution, many official clients & hackathons
- Zero-config distribution via PGLite/WASM + 1-command Claude Code install — ctx needs Docker Compose + Postgres + GPU inference setup
- Much broader feature scope (30+ MCP tools, 43 Skills, Minions job queue, durable subagents, push-based volunteer_context, advisor/doctor/sources-harden) vs ctx' deliberately lean 5-MCP-tool/~22-CLI-primitive set
- Schema packs/type system SHIPPED (policy-as-data, agent-authorable) — ctx only has a 4-enum block_role, a registry remains on the roadmap (GAP-C)
- Multi-query expansion available (optional Haiku phrasings) — ctx has expansion deliberately disabled (tight); recency/federation in production vs ctx's MT still under construction/not deployed
- Zero-LLM graph construction: no inference cost/no GPU bottleneck during linking — ctx' latent linking is expensive (single-RTX-6000 bottleneck)
vs. ctx gbrain and ctx are the closest direct relatives in the self-hosted agent-memory space and largely converge at the retrieval core (pgvector HNSW + Postgres FTS + RRF k=60). Since the previous comparison (2026-06-08), two axes have shifted: (1) Reranker — ctx has caught up with bge-reranker-v2-m3, and gbrain's zerank-2 lead is gone. (2) Graph at query time — on 2026-06-07 (v0.42.34.0) gbrain added deterministic typed multi-hop relational retrieval; ctx shipped post-RRF GraphExpand at the same time and has it active in THIS deployment via the Compose default (A/B-validated, graph+CE bw0.5 best, R@20 0.811). This means the briefing assumption that 'GAP-A is probably STILL OPEN' is, per the primary source, outdated: ctx now traverses the positive links — but as a boost/injection with the reranker as arbiter, NOT as gbrain's deterministic relational walk that constructs real cross-entity answers without a shared page. The real fork remains strategic: gbrain = a broad, MIT-licensed, Git-Markdown-centric single-operator knowledge OS with a public eval, hosted default, and mass mindshare; ctx = a focused, all-local-$0, MPL-2.0 single-binary primitive with LLM-inferred LATENT links, cyclic Temporal Gravity, and a cross-tenant/cross-LLM bridge as its differentiator. ctx leads on latent linking, temporal model, genuine data sovereignty/zero cost, and cross-tenant design; gbrain leads on deterministic relational graph answering, public benchmark, distribution/mindshare, and feature breadth.
Research basis & sources
Research 2026-06-17 (WebSearch + WebFetch GitHub/CHANGELOG/VERSION + vectorize.io review). gbrain state found: v0.42.51.0 (VERSION file, commit 2026-06-17), ~23.2k stars / ~331 commits on master, MIT, TypeScript/Bun, embedded PGLite (PG17/WASM)+pgvector. Key releases verified: v0.42.34.0 (06-07, graph traversal), v0.42.46.0 (06-16, federated read-scope), v0.42.43.0 (06-12, push-based volunteer_context). The ctx side was checked against the primary source (W3/W9): rrf/graph.go GraphExpand exists + is called in handler/query.go:617; product default CTX_GRAPH_EXPAND_ENABLED=false, but the docker-compose.yml default is :-true (active in this deployment); 5 MCP tools confirmed in handler/mcp.go. Note: the vectorize.io review figures (v0.30, single-operator, 'no multi-hop') are a May 2026 snapshot and partly outdated — the direct GitHub source (June) shows graph-query multi-hop, gbrain-base-v2, OAuth-DCR/federation, and Claude Code support.
Langdock (founded in Berlin, "Privacy by Design") is an enterprise AI platform that gives organizations a secure, model-agnostic wrapper over leading LLMs (OpenAI, Anthropic, Mistral — 30+ models): centralized AI chat, no-code assistants/agents each with their own system prompt and knowledge base, RAG over internal documents/databases/APIs, and workflow automation. The target audience is regulated and data-sensitive European companies (2000+ customers per their own claim) that want to roll out governance-compliant generative AI to their employees — SSO/SAML/SCIM, audit logs, granular permissions. It is a turnkey suite for end users, not a developer building block.
- Vendor / origin
- Langdock GmbH, Berlin (Germany); legal terms/DPA under German law
- Category
- Enterprise AI platform / Secure ChatGPT for business + assistants + RAG + workflows
- Hosting (default)
- Multi-tenant SaaS, Microsoft Azure, servers within the EU
- Enterprise deployment tiers
- Single-tenant SaaS (from 2,000 seats), Bring-Your-Own-Cloud (from 5,000 seats), on-premises via Kubernetes/Helm charts (from 5,000 seats)
- License / openness
- Proprietary / closed-source — no open-source license documented
- Retrieval / RAG
- RAG over external vector databases — Qdrant, Pinecone, Azure AI Search; custom RAG with your own response generation possible
- LLM models
- Model-agnostic, 30+ models (OpenAI/Anthropic/Mistral and others), bring-your-own keys; no use of customer data for training (contractually guaranteed)
- Compliance
- ISO 27001, SOC 2 Type II, GDPR; encryption TLS 1.2+ / AES-256; trust center + DPA
- Auth / governance
- SSO, SAML, SCIM, audit logs, granular permissions, admin controls
- Pricing model
- Per-user SaaS: Business ~20 €/user/month (up to 1,000 users); Workflows from 449 €/workspace/month; API/token = provider price + 10% markup; 7-day trial
Strengths- Turnkey enterprise suite out of the box: AI chat, no-code assistants, RAG knowledge, and workflows with no in-house development — deployable to employees immediately
- Strong compliance story for regulated EU companies: ISO 27001 + SOC 2 Type II + GDPR, DPA under German law, dedicated trust center
- EU data sovereignty by default (Azure hosting within the EU) plus escalating deployment tiers up to on-premises (Helm/K8s) for high-security customers
- Model-agnostic across 30+ LLMs (OpenAI/Anthropic/Mistral), bring-your-own keys, no vendor lock-in to a single model provider
- Enterprise governance built in: SSO/SAML/SCIM, audit logs, granular permissions, admin controls, integrations (Slack, MS Teams)
- Large commercial footprint (2000+ customers), professional support, predictable per-seat billing for org-wide rollouts
ctx +- Genuine openness & ownership: ctx is an MPL-2.0 open-source single binary; Langdock is proprietary/closed-source
- Cost model: ctx runs all-local at 0 € of ongoing cost (llama.cpp on-prem); Langdock costs ~20 €/user/month + 10% token markup + from 449 €/workspace for workflows
- Self-hosting without barriers: ctx is self-hosted from the ground up; Langdock on-prem/BYOC is only available from 2,000-5,000 seats — for small teams/individuals effectively SaaS-only
- Retrieval architecture as a USP: ctx fuses semantic + DE-FTS + EN-FTS + trigram title (GottZ 4-Way RRF) within a SINGLE Postgres transaction without an external vector store; Langdock depends on external vector databases (Qdrant/Pinecone/Azure AI Search) with network hops
- LLM-inferred LATENT links (Dream Mode), a cyclic Temporal Gravity model, and cross-encoder reranking — a depth of memory/retrieval that Langdock, as a platform wrapper, does not address
- Cross-LLM / cross-Tenant memory bridge serving as a persistent external brain across instances — Langdock is employee-/workspace-centric, not a shared memory layer for agents
- Fully local inference (llama.cpp): no data leaves to hosted LLM APIs; Langdock forwards prompts to external provider APIs (albeit contractually without training)
them +- Product maturity & breadth: a complete end-user platform (chat UI, no-code agents, workflows, integrations) rather than a focused memory/retrieval primitive
- Enterprise compliance certifications (ISO 27001, SOC 2 Type II) — formal audits that ctx cannot show
- Org-wide governance: SSO/SAML/SCIM, granular permissions, audit logs, admin dashboards for thousands of employees
- Scalable multi-tenancy is live and in production; ctx multi-tenancy is still under construction (not deployed)
- Managed service: no GPU/ops of your own required — Langdock runs inference and scaling; ctx requires self-operation (single-GPU bottleneck)
- Out-of-the-box access to 30+ commercial frontier models (GPT/Claude/Mistral) including hosting; ctx relies on its own on-prem models with limited throughput
- Commercial support, SLAs, a large customer base, and professional onboarding/consulting ecosystems
vs. ctx Langdock and ctx play in different leagues and categories: Langdock is a turnkey, commercially proprietary enterprise AI suite that rolls out governance-compliant generative AI (chat, assistants, RAG, workflows) to employees as a managed SaaS — its strength lies in compliance certification, EU data sovereignty, org governance, and out-of-the-box model access. ctx, by contrast, is a self-hosted, open-source (MPL-2.0) memory/retrieval primitive with 0 € of ongoing cost, fully local llama.cpp inference, and an architecturally distinct 4-Way RRF hybrid fusion (no external vector store), latent links, and cyclic Temporal Gravity. If you need a deployable, certified enterprise platform for many employees, choose Langdock; if you want a data-sovereign, cost-free, deeply controllable cross-LLM memory as a developer/architecture building block, choose ctx. ctx wins on zero data egress (no hosted API), cost, openness, and retrieval depth; Langdock wins on product breadth, formal compliance, scaling, and managed operation.
Research basis & sources
Research date 2026-06-17 (WebSearch + WebFetch on langdock.com/enterprise, /security, /pricing as well as third-party sources tldv.io, innfactory.ai, zylon.ai, workativ.com, as of June 2026). Langdock does not use a classic versioning scheme (continuous SaaS platform) — no public release/version status documented; most recent facts: ~20 €/user/month Business plan, Workflows from 449 €/workspace, 30+ models, on-prem via Helm from 5,000 seats.
Microsoft Azure AI (Knowledge/Retrieval/Memory-Stack: Azure AI Search / Foundry IQ, Foundry Agent Service Memory, Azure OpenAI)
referenceMicrosoft's fully managed, cloud-hosted enterprise RAG stack — hybrid retrieval (vector + keyword + RRF) with the Bing semantic ranker, agentic multi-query retrieval, and managed long-term agent memory — the platform/suite antithesis to ctx's self-hosted single binary.
https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/products/ai-services/ai-searchNot a single product, but a cohesive knowledge/retrieval/memory stack inside Microsoft Foundry (formerly Azure AI Foundry). At its core is Azure AI Search (a managed search/retrieval engine, now branded "Foundry IQ"), layered with Foundry IQ Knowledge Bases (a reusable, permission-aware knowledge layer over M365/SharePoint/OneLake/Fabric/Web/MCP) and Foundry Agent Service Memory (managed long-term agent memory). LLM inference and embeddings come from Azure OpenAI. Target audience: enterprise teams within the Microsoft/Azure ecosystem that build RAG apps, Copilot extensions, and multi-agent solutions without operating their own retrieval infrastructure.
- Hosting/License
- Fully managed Azure cloud service, proprietary/closed-source, no self-hosting (VNet integration for memory stores is explicitly unsupported).
- Retrieval architecture
- Hybrid: vector + keyword/BM25 + Reciprocal Rank Fusion (RRF), with a transformer-based semantic ranker on top (L2 reranking, multilingual deep-learning models from Microsoft Bing) — conceptually comparable to ctx's GottZ 4-Way RRF + bge-reranker, but as a managed black box.
- Agentic Retrieval (GA 2026-04-01 API)
- An LLM (Azure OpenAI) decomposes a complex query into focused subqueries, executed in parallel (keyword/vector/hybrid), each semantically reranked individually, then fused into a unified grounding answer; reasoning effort minimal/low/medium; returns references plus an activity log.
- MCP integration
- Every Knowledge Base is a native MCP server and exposes the knowledge_base_retrieve tool; callable from Foundry Agent Service, GitHub Copilot, Claude, and Cursor — direct functional overlap with ctx's MCP layer.
- Agent memory (Public Preview, as of 2026-06)
- Foundry Agent Service Memory: managed long-term memory, 3 types (User Profile / Chat Summary / Procedural), LLM-driven extraction → consolidation (merge + conflict resolution) → retrieval; item-level CRUD, store-default TTL, direct remember/forget commands, multimodal (images).
- Memory quotas/scope
- Max. 100 scopes per store, 10,000 memories per scope, 1,000 search and 1,000 update requests/min; scope must be set explicitly in low-level APIs (auto-resolution only via the memory-search tool with scope={{$userId}}).
- Knowledge Sources (Foundry IQ)
- Indexed + remote: M365 SharePoint, Fabric IQ, OneLake, Azure Blob, Azure AI Search, Web, MCP (private preview); automatic ingest → chunk → vectorize → hybrid retrieval; permission-aware grounding via Microsoft Graph.
- Cost model (as of June 2026)
- Dedicated: Free (50 MB / 10,000 docs) → Basic ~$0.10/h → Standard S1 ~$250/month (160 GB) → S3 ~$1.39/h (~$981/SU/month, 512 GB). Semantic ranker and agentic retrieval billed separately (ranker per 1,000 queries; agentic token-based). Azure OpenAI inference/embeddings additional, pay-as-you-go. Serverless preview — billing start announced for late 2026.
- Temporal model
- No built-in cyclic-temporal relevance model; memory offers TTL (retention/expiry), but no time-of-day/weekday/seasonal gravitation like ctx's GottZ Cyclic Phase Model.
Strengths- Fully managed and elastically scaling — no operating a DB, GPU, or embedding pipeline; Microsoft runs retrieval + inference
- Deep native integration into the Microsoft/M365 ecosystem: permission-aware grounding via Microsoft Graph, SharePoint, OneLake, Fabric, Copilot extension
- Agentic Retrieval as a managed multi-query decomposition + rerank pipeline (GA 2026-04-01) — ctx has deliberately disabled multi-query expansion
- Managed long-term memory with genuine personalization semantics (user-profile memory, procedural how-to routines, multimodal/images) out of the box
- Enterprise compliance/governance built in: content safety + prompt-injection detection, region selection, Microsoft Product Terms / DPA
- Broad SDK/language coverage (C#, Java, JS, Python, REST) and established tooling/portal experience
ctx +- Self-hosted, all-local: full data sovereignty, $0 ongoing hosting/API fees — Azure bills the search tier + semantic ranker + agentic tokens + Azure OpenAI inference/embeddings separately and can get expensive at volume
- Single-Go-binary simplicity instead of a multi-service suite (AI Search + Foundry IQ + Agent Service + Azure OpenAI as separate, separately billed building blocks)
- Hybrid fusion in ONE Postgres transaction (semantic + EN-FTS + DE-FTS + trigram title) — no network hop to an external managed vector store; with Azure the fusion is a managed black box with no weight/k control
- LLM-inferred LATENT cross-reference links (Dream Mode, 5 types) discover non-explicit relationships — Azure memory only consolidates/merges, it does not build a latent knowledge graph
- Cyclic-temporal relevance model (GottZ Cyclic Phase Model: weekday/month/quarter/season/daily + Gaussian decay + Temporal Gravity) — Azure only knows TTL expiry, no cyclic temporal weighting
- MPL-2.0 open source, fully inspectable and forkable — Azure is proprietary/closed-source
- No vendor lock-in into the Microsoft/Azure ecosystem; runs on your own hardware with llama.cpp on-prem
- Full control over embedding/reranker/LLM models (Qwen3-Embedding-8B, bge-reranker-v2-m3, qwen3) instead of being tied to supported Azure OpenAI deployments
them +- Zero operational overhead — no dedicated GPU/DB/pipeline; ctx is limited by a single RTX 6000 GPU/throughput, and CPU embedding is the bottleneck for bulk rebuilds
- Elastic scaling across tiers/SUs and (upcoming) serverless — ctx does not scale horizontally
- Managed long-term agent memory with a ready-made extraction/consolidation/conflict-resolution pipeline and personalization semantics (user-profile, procedural, multimodal) — ctx has Guard (dedup) + Dream (links), but no comparable automatic memory distillation per user scope
- Agentic multi-query retrieval as a GA feature — ctx has deliberately disabled multi-query expansion; ctx does not traverse the graph @query (Dream links serve only as a supersedes drop filter)
- Deep enterprise integration (M365/SharePoint/Graph/OneLake/Fabric/Copilot, permission-aware grounding) and broad knowledge-source connectors — ctx only has Obsidian ingestion + Blob
- Enterprise governance/compliance guarantees (SLA, DPA, content safety, regions, certifications) and established support — ctx is single-maintainer OSS
- Mature multimodality (memory over images) — ctx is text/embedding-centric
vs. ctx Azure AI is the enterprise-platform antithesis to ctx: maximum convenience, scaling, and ecosystem integration versus full cost transparency, data sovereignty, and architectural control. Functionally there are real overlaps — hybrid + RRF + semantic reranking aligns conceptually with ctx's GottZ 4-Way RRF + bge-reranker, and Foundry Agent Memory is the most direct commercial counterpart to ctx as a memory layer (with an MCP endpoint that, like ctx, is callable from Claude/Cursor). Azure is superior where ctx deliberately draws boundaries: managed multi-query agentic retrieval, automatic memory distillation per user, M365 Graph grounding, and elastic scaling. ctx is superior on $0 hosting/data sovereignty, single-binary simplicity, latent LLM links, cyclic-temporal gravitation, and MPL-2.0 openness without vendor lock-in. Differently positioned: Azure targets enterprise teams that consume retrieval as a managed service and pay per query/token/SU; ctx targets the self-hosting architect who wants a cross-LLM/cross-tenant memory bridge on their own hardware without ongoing cloud costs.
Research basis & sources
Researched 2026-06-17 via WebSearch/WebFetch. Version/release status: Azure AI Search agentic retrieval GA in REST API 2026-04-01 (portal/preview features in 2026-05-01-preview); Foundry Agent Service Memory in Public Preview (docs as of 2026-06-02/-04, new multimodal/TTL/direct-command capabilities at Build 2026); Foundry IQ as the brand for the knowledge-retrieval layer over Azure AI Search; pricing as of June 2026 (Free 50MB/10k docs, Basic ~$0.10/h, S1 ~$250/month, S3 ~$1.39/h/~$981/SU/month; serverless billing announced for late 2026). Concrete dollar/SU figures from third-party sources (the main pricing page timed out) — flagged as approximations, not every number verified against the official live price list (W3/W9).
Mem0
AI Agent Memory Layer (Open-Source Library + Hosted Platform)The de facto standard "memory layer" for AI agents — an open-source library (Apache-2.0, ~58.8k stars) plus a hosted platform, with hybrid vector+graph+KV storage and publicly marketed best-in-class benchmark scores.
https://mem0.ai · https://github.com/mem0ai/mem0Mem0 ("mem-zero") is a dedicated memory layer that gives AI agents and assistants persistent memory across user, session, and agent levels. It positions memory as a distinct architectural component alongside the context window: relevant facts are extracted from conversations, deduplicated, and retrieved across calls — with, per its own marketing, ~90% lower token costs compared to full-history prompting. The target audience is app and agent developers who want to buy memory as an infrastructure building block — either as a self-hosted Python/Node library or Docker server, or as a managed SaaS. It is not a knowledge-base tool for humans but an agent memory API with a large framework ecosystem (LangChain, CrewAI, LlamaIndex, Vercel AI SDK, and others).
- License
- Apache-2.0 (OSS library + self-hosted server)
- GitHub
- mem0ai/mem0, ~58,800 stars, primarily Python; active (e.g., OpenCode plugin v0.2.0, 2026-06-17)
- Vendor
- Mem0 Inc. (commercial startup, mem0.ai) — open-core model
- Storage architecture
- Hybrid of 3 backends in parallel: vector (semantic), graph (entity relations, multi-hop), key-value (exact match); a routing layer picks the backend per retrieval
- Memory management
- LLM-driven: for each new fact the LLM decides ADD / UPDATE / DELETE / NOOP; graph and vector writes run in parallel (ThreadPoolExecutor) + history audit log
- Self-hosted stack
- 3 Docker containers: FastAPI REST API + PostgreSQL/pgvector + Neo4j (graph). Vector store is swappable (Qdrant default, Chroma, Pinecone, Milvus, FAISS, 20+)
- LLM dependency
- Requires an external LLM provider — default OpenAI (gpt-5-mini/nano + text-embedding-3-small); configurable locally via Ollama (llama3.1 + nomic-embed-text)
- Benchmarks (public, marketed)
- LoCoMo 91.6 · LongMemEval 94.8 · BEAM 1M 64.1 / 10M 48.6; arXiv:2504.19413 (2025)
- Multi-tenancy
- Shipped & first-class: scoping via metadata — user_id / agent_id / run_id / app_id / org_id / project_id; server mode with per-user API keys + audit logs
- MCP
- OpenMemory MCP (local MCP server) — currently being SUNSET; the recommendation is now a self-hosted Mem0 server with dashboard
- Platform pricing
- Free 10K memories / 1K retrievals; $19/mo (50K); Pro $249/mo. Graph memory is paywalled, available only from Pro
- Platform-exclusive
- Web dashboard/analytics, webhooks, memory export, Advanced Filters v2, custom categories, auto-scaling, built-in auth
Strengths- Market-leader mindshare and a huge ecosystem: ~58.8k stars, 21+ official framework/platform integrations, broad adoption as the standard memory layer
- Publicly verifiable best-in-class benchmark scores (LoCoMo, LongMemEval, BEAM) plus an arXiv paper — external validation rather than only in-house eval
- Explicit knowledge-graph layer (Neo4j/FalkorDB): entity relations are actually traversed for multi-hop at query time
- LLM-driven incremental memory management (ADD/UPDATE/DELETE/NOOP) with deduplication and audit history — memories are actively consolidated, not just appended
- Pluggable: free choice of vector DB (20+), LLM provider (10+), embedder — very flexible to integrate
- Two operating modes: a fast managed SaaS (5-minute onboarding) OR fully self-hosted for data sovereignty — low barrier to entry
- Mature multi-tenant primitives (user/agent/org/project scopes, per-user keys, server mode) already shipped in production
ctx +- True single-binary simplicity: ctx is ONE Go monolith on a single Postgres DB — mem0 self-hosting needs 3 containers (FastAPI + pgvector + a separate Neo4j) plus its own auth via a reverse proxy and open CORS defaults
- No external vector store and no second graph DBMS: ctx fuses semantics + DE/EN FTS + trigram in ONE SQL transaction (4-Way RRF), with no network hop and no polyglot-persistence operational burden
- Consistently local inference by default ($0 ongoing API costs): ctx runs llama.cpp on-prem; mem0 is wired out of the box to an external LLM API (OpenAI gpt-5-mini) — local/Ollama is possible, but not the default path
- LLM-inferred LATENT links (Dream Mode, 5 types) discover non-explicit relationships — mem0's graph primarily stores explicit entity relations (Alice—works_at—Google)
- Cyclic Phase Model + Temporal Gravity (7 cyclic time dimensions, Gaussian decay) — a temporal depth that mem0 does not have in this form
- Cross-tenant/cross-LLM memory bridge with the GottZ Scope Model as a design goal — mem0 tenancy is isolation via metadata, not a shared cross-tenant knowledge layer
- MPL-2.0 + a fully hardened web frontend (dashboard/graph map/workbench) is part of the self-hosted core in ctx — in mem0 the dashboard is platform-exclusive, and the local MCP server (OpenMemory) is currently being deprecated
- Human-centric knowledge store (CLI query/save, Obsidian ingestion, blob storage) rather than a pure agent memory API
them +- Dramatically greater reach, maturity, and community (~58.8k stars, commercially funded) — ctx is a single-author project with ~434 blocks
- Public, independent benchmarks + a research paper; ctx has only an in-house eval.sh without an external benchmark like LongMemEval
- The knowledge graph is actually traversed at query time (multi-hop) — in ctx the graph is NOT traversed at query time (an open weakness)
- Multi-tenancy is shipped in production (user/agent/org/project, server mode, per-user keys); ctx multi-tenancy is still under construction (~20/44 waves, not deployed)
- Managed SaaS option with auto-scaling/HA and 5-minute onboarding — zero operational overhead, which ctx as pure self-hosting does not offer
- Huge plugin/framework ecosystem (LangChain, CrewAI, LlamaIndex, Vercel AI SDK, 21+) and freedom of choice in vector DB/LLM/embedder
- Cloud-/provider-agnostic and broad in languages/SDKs (Python + TypeScript) — ctx is a Go monolith plus llama.cpp, more committed to a single topology
vs. ctx Mem0 and ctx solve related problems from opposite directions. Mem0 is a broadly adopted agent memory infrastructure with an open-core business model, public best-in-class benchmark scores, real graph traversal, and mature multi-tenancy — but it is a polyglot-persistence framework (pgvector + Neo4j + vector store) with a default dependency on an external LLM API, and some of its convenience features (dashboard, filters, local MCP) are partly platform-exclusive or in sunset. ctx, by contrast, is a hardened single-binary appliance: everything in one Postgres transaction (4-Way RRF), consistently local inference at $0 API cost, latent rather than only explicit links, a more sophisticated cyclic-temporal model, and a fully integrated web frontend — but it is a single-author project without an external benchmark, with a graph that is not yet traversed and a multi-tenancy that is not deployed. Rule of thumb: if you need maximum reach, SaaS convenience, a multi-hop graph, and validation, pick mem0; if you prioritize data sovereignty, operational simplicity, zero API cost, and temporal/latent retrieval depth, you are better served by ctx. They are more like different bets than direct competitors for the same audience.
Research basis & sources
Research 2026-06-17 via WebSearch/WebFetch (mem0.ai docs/blog + GitHub mem0ai/mem0). Status: Apache-2.0, ~58,800 GitHub stars, primarily Python; most recent activity OpenCode plugin v0.2.0 from 2026-06-17 (mem0 does not use a classic single-version release but rolling package/plugin releases). Benchmark values LoCoMo 91.6 / LongMemEval 94.8 / BEAM 64.1(1M)/48.6(10M) per the GitHub README (note: some secondary sources/blog cite slightly different values, LoCoMo 92.5 / LongMemEval 94.4 — the canonical README numbers are used here, W3/W9). Platform pricing Free/$19/$249 Pro and the graph paywall from Pro as of June 2026; OpenMemory MCP officially in sunset.
Letta (formerly MemGPT)
competitorPlatform for stateful AI agents with a self-editing memory hierarchy (core/recall/archival) — born from the Berkeley research project MemGPT, and increasingly oriented in 2026 toward the coding agent "Letta Code".
https://www.letta.comLetta is an open-source platform (Apache-2.0) for building "stateful agents": LLM agents that learn over time, remember, and curate their own memory. At its core is the operating-system analogy inherited from MemGPT (UC Berkeley, 2023): the context window is limited "RAM", external storage is "disk", and the agent itself moves data between the two. The target audience is developers and teams who want to build long-lived, model-agnostic agents with transparent, persistent memory — as an alternative to the closed agent stacks from OpenAI/Anthropic/Google. In 2026 the focus has shifted strongly toward "Letta Code" (a memory-first coding-agent harness competing with Claude Code) and the "Constellation" cloud.
- License
- Apache-2.0 (fully open source, no license fees)
- Latest stable version
- v0.16.8 (May 14, 2026); plus letta-nightly
- GitHub
- letta-ai/letta — ~23.4k stars, Python (99.5%)
- Language/stack
- Python; PostgreSQL as the state store
- Memory hierarchy
- Core (in-context, pinned memory blocks) · Recall (searchable message history) · Archival (semantically searchable long-term storage)
- Retrieval (self-hosted)
- pgvector for vector search; hybrid RRF (vector + full-text) supported; embedding pinned per agent
- Retrieval (cloud API)
- TurboPuffer for fast semantic search; default embedding text-embedding-3-small (OpenAI)
- Reranking
- No cross-encoder reranking (per a 2026 comparative analysis, neither Letta nor Mem0)
- Retrieval paradigm
- Agentic — the agent itself calls tool functions per memory tier (not deterministic fusion ahead of the LLM)
- Multi-agent/async
- Sleep-time agents: background agents share the primary agent's memory blocks and modify them asynchronously; shared memory blocks between agents
- MCP/integration
- Server-side MCP integrations are being phased out in 2026 in favor of client-side skills; ADE as the dev/debug interface
- Cloud pricing (June 2026)
- Free $0 (up to 3 managed agents, BYOK) · Pro $20/month (up to 20 stateful agents + Letta auto-quota, PAYG overage) · Teams/Enterprise custom. Previous $200 Max tier removed
- Self-hosting
- Docker (official image, downgraded to a product surface in 2026); Railway template with PostgreSQL+pgvector; free apart from hosting/API usage
- Benchmarks
- No published LongMemEval results (per third-party analysis 2026)
- Recommended models
- Model-agnostic; the docs recommend Opus 4.5 and GPT-5.2 for best performance
Strengths- Self-editing memory: agents actively curate what they retain via tool calls — not just passive RAG storage
- Mature, research-grounded memory-OS model (MemGPT/Berkeley) with a clear core/recall/archival hierarchy and explicit memory blocks including character limits
- Agent Development Environment (ADE): visual debugging of the entire context window (memory, state, prompts, tool execution) — strong developer experience
- Sleep-time agents: asynchronous background processing of memory blocks; multiple agents share shared memory blocks (multi-agent coordination over shared state)
- Complete, cohesive platform: runtime + memory + tooling + cloud (Constellation) + coding agent (Letta Code)
- Model-agnostic with BYOK on all tiers (OpenAI/Anthropic/OpenRouter); no model-level vendor lock-in
- Large mindshare/community (~23.4k GitHub stars), Apache-2.0, broad ecosystem (Aurora PostgreSQL reference, Codecademy course)
ctx +- Retrieval depth: ctx runs 4-Way RRF (semantic + EN-FTS + DE-FTS + trigram title) PLUS cross-encoder reranking (bge-reranker-v2-m3, A/B-proven). Letta uses at best a 2-way hybrid (vector + FTS) and NO cross-encoder reranking
- Deterministic retrieval fused ahead of the LLM in a SINGLE Postgres transaction vs. Letta's agentic retrieval, where every memory operation costs inference tokens and quality depends on the model's judgment
- $0 running costs / fully on-prem (llama.cpp + local embeddings) — Letta's default embedding (text-embedding-3-small) and cloud search (TurboPuffer) are hosted/API-bound; fully local is possible with Letta but not the maintained default path
- LLM-inferred LATENT links (Dream Mode, 5 types) surface non-explicit relationships — Letta has no comparable automatic cross-reference / link-graph concept across the knowledge base
- Cyclic Temporal Gravity (7 cyclic dimensions, Gaussian decay) as a ranking signal — not present in Letta
- Cross-Tenant/Cross-LLM memory bridge with the GottZ Scope Model (private/hth/shared) as a shared knowledge layer across instances — Letta's sharing is agent/block-centric, not designed as a cross-tenant knowledge bridge
- Single Go binary, no external vector store required — Letta is Python and, in a self-hosted setup, depends on a separate PostgreSQL/pgvector instance
- Guard: async duplicate detection (HNSW similarity, auto-archive/flag) — Letta has no dedicated dedupe of the knowledge base
them +- Active agentic memory: Letta's agents edit their own memory (write/update/consolidate), whereas ctx is primarily a retrieval/storage layer that the LLM caller feeds — Letta is the complete agent loop including memory management
- Sleep-time agents as a first-class concept: asynchronous background consolidation with shared memory blocks — comparable to ctx Dream/Guard, but in Letta integrated directly into the agent runtime and documented as a product feature
- Agent Development Environment (ADE): a mature visual UI for inspecting/debugging context, state, and tool calls — ctx does have a web frontend (dashboard/graph/workbench), but no comparable agent-loop debugger
- Mature platform & ecosystem: ~23.4k stars, managed cloud (Constellation), coding agent (Letta Code), Aurora PostgreSQL scaling reference, commercial support, courses — vs. ctx as a single-maintainer project
- Out-of-the-box cloud scaling (TurboPuffer for hundreds of thousands of memories, managed scaling) — ctx is single-GPU/single-node and CPU-limited on bulk embedding
- Multi-tenancy/multi-agent is production-ready and managed in Letta; ctx multi-tenancy is still under construction (20/44 waves, not deployed)
- Established research brand (MemGPT) with broad adoption and documentation; ctx is proprietary/niche with no public benchmark history
vs. ctx Letta and ctx address related but distinct layers: Letta is a complete agent platform whose memory the agent manages itself via tool calls (agentic, token-consuming, model-dependent), whereas ctx is a dedicated, deterministic retrieval/memory layer that fuses and ranks knowledge ahead of the LLM. On the pure retrieval axis, ctx is deeper (4-Way RRF + cross-encoder reranking + Cyclic Temporal Gravity + latent Dream links, all as local SQL with no API costs) — Letta stays at a 2-way hybrid without a cross-encoder and has no published memory benchmarks. Letta's strengths lie elsewhere: active self-editing memory, sleep-time agents, the mature ADE debugging, and a commercially scaling cloud with a large ecosystem. Fairly framed: anyone who wants a local, cost-free, ranking-strong cross-LLM knowledge store is better served by ctx; anyone looking for a ready-made stateful-agent runtime with a managed cloud and self-curation is better served by Letta — the two are more complementary than direct one-to-one competitors.
Research basis & sources
Researched on 2026-06-17 via WebSearch/WebFetch (letta.com, docs.letta.com, GitHub letta-ai/letta, vectorize.io, AWS blog). Status: stable v0.16.8 (2026-05-14), Apache-2.0, ~23.4k GitHub stars; cloud pricing Free/$20 Pro/Enterprise (Max tier $200 removed). Strategic 2026 pivot toward "Letta Code" + "Constellation" cloud (blog "our-next-phase", 2026-03-16; LettaBot folded into Letta Code as channels in May 2026). Retrieval details (pgvector self-hosted / TurboPuffer cloud, text-embedding-3-small, hybrid RRF, no cross-encoder, no LongMemEval publication) drawn from docs + third-party comparative analyses, June 2026 — Letta's implementation internals are only partially documented officially (flagged accordingly, W3/W9).
Zep / Graphiti (getzep.com)
competitorTemporal knowledge graph as agent memory — a cloud service (Zep) built on an open-source engine (Graphiti, Apache-2.0), both running on an external graph DB rather than a Postgres monolith.
https://www.getzep.comZep is a commercial, cloud-hosted memory layer for AI agents; its open-source core, Graphiti, is a temporal-aware knowledge graph engine. Both model knowledge as a graph of entities, relationships, and facts, where each fact carries a validity window (when it became true, when it was superseded). Graphiti's target audience: Python developers who want to self-host and build their own agent memory. Zep Cloud's target audience: teams and enterprises (finance, healthcare, legal) that want compliance (SOC2/HIPAA/GDPR) and a managed service rather than self-operation.
- Vendor / Repo
- Zep AI; github.com/getzep/graphiti (OSS core), getzep.com (Cloud)
- Graphiti Version
- v0.29.2 (08.06.2026), 27.6k GitHub stars, Apache-2.0
- Language
- Python (99.4%), Python 3.10+
- Storage Backend
- External graph DB required: Neo4j 5.26+, FalkorDB 1.1.2+, Amazon Neptune; Kuzu 0.11.2 deprecated
- Retrieval
- Hybrid: cosine similarity + BM25 + breadth-first search; reranker RRF / MMR / cross-encoder; node-distance reranking; sub-second latency
- LLM Provider
- OpenAI (default), Anthropic, Google Gemini, Groq, Azure; OpenAI-compatible: Ollama/vLLM/llama.cpp/LM Studio/DeepSeek/OpenRouter
- Embeddings
- OpenAI, Azure OpenAI, Google Gemini, Voyage
- MCP
- Dedicated MCP server in the repo (Claude + other clients), FastAPI REST API
- Benchmark
- Zep: LongMemEval 63.8% (vs Mem0 49.0%); DMR 94.8% (GPT-4 Turbo) / 98.2% (GPT-4o Mini)
- Zep Cloud Pricing
- Free 1,000 credits/mo; Flex $104/mo (50k credits); Flex Plus $312/mo (200k credits); Enterprise custom
- Self-Hosting
- Graphiti freely self-hostable; Zep Cloud BYOC Enterprise only; Zep Community Edition deprecated (April 2025, feature retirement Feb 2026, code in legacy/)
- Compliance
- Zep Cloud: SOC 2 Type II, HIPAA BAA, GDPR; 1-year audit-log retention (Enterprise)
Strengths- A true, bi-temporal knowledge graph: every fact has a validity window (valid-from/valid-to) and, on contradiction, is invalidated rather than overwritten — enabling historical queries
- The graph is actually traversed at retrieval time (node-distance reranking, BFS) — relationships are a first-class query dimension
- Public benchmark track record (LongMemEval 63.8%, DMR ~95-98%) — verifiable, published numbers plus an arXiv paper
- Broad provider matrix: 6+ LLM providers, 4 embedding providers, 4 graph DBs — flexibly interchangeable
- Strong OSS momentum: 27.6k stars, active releases (most recently June 2026), MCP server out of the box
- The cloud variant delivers enterprise compliance (SOC2/HIPAA/GDPR) turnkey — RFP-ready for regulated industries
- Incremental updates without graph recompute — scales for continuous data ingestion
ctx +- A genuine single-binary monolith + ONE Postgres instance — Graphiti additionally requires a separate graph DB (Neo4j/FalkorDB/Neptune) as an operational and licensing-cost factor
- Hybrid fusion (GottZ 4-Way RRF: Semantic + EN-FTS + DE-FTS + trigram title) runs in ONE SQL transaction with no network hop; Graphiti coordinates at the app layer against an external graph DB
- $0 running cost / all-local: no cloud API fees, no credit model — Zep Cloud costs $104-312/mo+; Graphiti OSS defaults to paid OpenAI APIs
- Fully on-prem (llama.cpp): data sovereignty by default; Zep self-host ships without a compliance stack, compliance only in the paid cloud
- A dedicated GottZ Cyclic Phase Model (7 phases, Gaussian decay, Temporal Gravity) — finer-grained than Graphiti's pure valid-from/valid-to window
- LLM-inferred LATENT links (Dream Mode, 5 types) discover non-explicit relationships, not just extracted entities/edges
- Native bilingual full-text search (DE+EN FTS) + query translation DE→EN with a domain glossary — Graphiti's BM25 is not designed to be language-dual
- Cross-Tenant/Cross-LLM memory bridge as a design goal spanning multiple Anthropic tenants
them +- The graph is traversed at query time (node-distance/BFS) — by its own positioning, the ctx graph is NOT traversed (Dream links serve only as a supersedes filter)
- Bi-temporal fact invalidation with validity windows is more mature and more explicit than ctx's Temporal Gravity
- Public, reproducible benchmarks (LongMemEval/DMR) plus a peer-reviewed paper — ctx's eval is endogenous (its own eval.sh, frozen baseline, no public benchmark)
- Managed cloud + enterprise compliance (SOC2/HIPAA/GDPR, BAA, audit retention) available immediately — ctx has nothing comparable
- Multi-tenancy is solved in production in Zep Cloud — ctx's MT is still under construction (not deployed)
- A markedly larger ecosystem/adoption (27.6k stars, many integrations/forks) and a larger provider portfolio
- Horizontal scaling via the cloud backend; ctx is single-GPU-bound (one RTX 6000)
- The Python ecosystem lowers the barrier to entry for the AI/agent majority (ctx is Go + self-hosting-oriented)
vs. ctx Zep/Graphiti and ctx solve the same problem (persistent LLM memory) with opposing architectural philosophies: Graphiti relies on a true, bi-temporal knowledge graph in a separate graph DB with query-time traversal and published benchmarks; ctx relies on a single-binary Postgres monolith with GottZ 4-Way RRF hybrid fusion in a single transaction, latent LLM links, and $0 all-local operation. Graphiti wins on genuine graph traversal, benchmark evidence, provider breadth, and (via Zep Cloud) enterprise compliance/managed operation/multi-tenancy. ctx wins on operational simplicity (no second datastore), zero cost, data sovereignty by default, bilingual search, and a fine-grained GottZ Cyclic Phase Model. A fair assessment: Graphiti is the more mature, more widely adopted "platform with a cloud upsell"; ctx is the leaner, fully sovereign self-hosted primitive — though ctx's open flanks (no query-time graph traversal, endogenous eval, MT still under construction) are precisely Graphiti's strengths.
Research basis & sources
Research 2026-06-17 (WebSearch/WebFetch). Status: Graphiti v0.29.2 (08.06.2026), 27.6k GitHub stars, Apache-2.0, Python 3.10+. Zep Cloud Free/Flex ($104)/Flex Plus ($312)/Enterprise; Zep Community Edition deprecated April 2025, feature retirement Feb 2026 (code in legacy/). Benchmark figures (LongMemEval 63.8%, DMR 94.8/98.2%) from Zep's own sources/arXiv 2501.13956 — vendor claims, not independently re-measured (W3/W9).
Pinecone, Weaviate, and Qdrant are the three leading dedicated vector databases (as of June 2026). They store embeddings, build ANN indexes (HNSW), and serve nearest-neighbor search — by now uniformly including hybrid search (dense + sparse/BM25) and, in some cases, integrated reranking. Their target audience is developers and platform teams building semantic search, recommendation, or RAG pipelines for AI agents. The decisive point for this comparison: this is retrieval INFRASTRUCTURE (the index and search building block), not a turnkey memory/knowledge system. Synthesis, graph relationships, temporal logic, the scope model, and the actual memory layer are built by the user on top of it — which is precisely what ctx already provides as an opinionated end-to-end pipeline.
- Pinecone — model
- Proprietary, fully-managed SaaS (no self-hosting; BYOC on AWS/GCP/Azure in preview), Rust engine, serverless
- Pinecone — cost
- Read/Write units + storage (~$3.60/GB/mo); Standard $8.25/1M RU + $2/1M WU; ~$70/mo @10M, ~$700+/mo @100M vectors
- Pinecone — retrieval
- Hybrid (semantic+keyword) native, Integrated Inference (hosted embedding+reranking: pinecone-rerank-v0, cohere-rerank-v3.5, bge-reranker-v2-m3), Pinecone Assistant, ~8ms p50
- Weaviate — model
- Open source (Apache 2.0), written in Go; self-hosted (Docker/K8s) OR Weaviate Cloud; seamless migration managed↔self-hosted
- Weaviate — cost
- Self-hosted free; Cloud Flex from $45/mo (Oct 2025 $25 tier retired), Plus from $280/mo annual; ~$135/mo @10M, ~$900+/mo @100M
- Weaviate — retrieval
- BM25F + dense + metadata filters in a single query (alpha-weighted fusion), reranker/generator/reader modules, multimodal (text/image/audio), GraphQL+gRPC; 2,000+ companies in prod, 14k+ GitHub stars
- Qdrant — model
- Open source (Apache 2.0), written in Rust; self-hosted/cloud/hybrid/edge (Qdrant Edge); 250M+ downloads, 29k+ stars, 146 employees (May 2026)
- Qdrant — cost/funding
- Self-hosted free (~$30–50/mo VPS); Cloud ~$65/mo @10M, ~$350/mo @100M; Series B $50M (2026-03-12), $87.8M total
- Qdrant — retrieval
- Dense + sparse + multivector/ColBERT late-interaction + custom scoring in a single query, Binary Quantization (up to 40x), GPU indexing, filter-aware HNSW, ~4ms p50 (fastest in the group)
- Shared class
- All = vector index + ANN search. NO LLM-synthesized answer, no latent knowledge graph, no cyclic-temporal model, no memory-pipeline layer out of the box — the user builds RAG/memory on top
Strengths- Massive scaling: billions of vectors, distributed/sharded clusters, multi-AZ — far beyond ctx's single node
- Mature managed clouds with SLA, auto-scaling, monitoring (Pinecone serverless, Weaviate Cloud, Qdrant Cloud)
- Quantization for memory efficiency: Qdrant Binary (up to 40x, SIMD popcount), Scalar/Product (8–64x)
- Sub-10ms latency on billion-scale datasets (Qdrant ~4ms, Pinecone ~8ms, Weaviate ~10ms p50)
- Sparse vectors, multivector/ColBERT late-interaction, multimodal (text/image/audio) — broader retrieval primitives
- Large ecosystems, SDKs, LangChain/LlamaIndex integrations, VC-funded (Qdrant Series B $50M 2026), enterprise-proven
ctx +- Turnkey memory store rather than just an index: ctx delivers the complete opinionated pipeline (synthesized answer, sources, Scope, temporal) — with the vector-DB class you build RAG/memory on top yourself
- Hybrid fusion in a SINGLE Postgres transaction: GottZ 4-Way RRF (semantic + EN-FTS + DE-FTS + trigram title) over the same tables, no network hop to an external vector store
- LLM synthesis built in (qwen3.6:27b, fact extraction): ctx returns a condensed answer + sources, not just hit lists like the pure vector engines
- LLM-inferred LATENT links (Dream Mode, 5 types) — discovers non-explicit relationships; the vector DBs offer only vector neighborhood, no semantic relationship graph
- GottZ Cyclic Phase Model: 7 cyclic temporal dimensions + Temporal Gravity as a post-RRF reranker — present in none of the three engines
- $0 running cost / all-local: no read/write-unit fees, no storage pricing, no cloud bill that climbs to $350–900/mo at 100M vectors
- Cross-tenant/cross-LLM memory bridge + Scope isolation as SQL — a shared knowledge layer across instances; the vector DBs offer only namespaces/collections for tenant separation, no memory bridge
- MPL-2.0 + single binary (CLI+daemon) on an existing Postgres — no separate vector-DB component to operate (Weaviate/Qdrant require their own service, Pinecone the cloud)
them +- Scaling in another league: billions of vectors, horizontal sharding clusters, multi-AZ — ctx is single-node on an RTX 6000, with limited inference/embedding throughput
- Managed option without ops: Pinecone Cloud/Weaviate Cloud/Qdrant Cloud handle operations, scaling, backups — ctx is pure self-hosting
- Quantization (Qdrant Binary up to 40x, Product 8–64x) for extreme memory efficiency — ctx uses Matryoshka truncation to 1024d, but no comparable quantization pipeline
- Sub-10ms retrieval on massive datasets without LLM-synthesis latency; ctx pays the synthesis time of the local LLM stage
- Richer retrieval primitives: sparse vectors, multivector/ColBERT, multimodal (image/audio) — ctx is text- and block-centric
- Mature, documented SDKs/integrations + a large ecosystem + enterprise support/SLA; ctx is a single-author project (GottZ) with an endogenous eval.sh rather than a public benchmark
vs. ctx A wrong comparison at the product level, the right one at the architecture level: Pinecone/Weaviate/Qdrant are the index and search INFRASTRUCTURE, while ctx is the turnkey memory store. The three engines deliver first-class, scalable vector/hybrid search (billions of vectors, quantization, sub-10ms) — but synthesis, the latent graph, the temporal model, Scope, and the memory pipeline are built by the user on top, typically as an "external vector store + self-built RAG" with a network hop to the DB. ctx collapses exactly these layers: pgvector is just the index, while GottZ 4-Way RRF fusion, FTS, latent links, cyclic temporal gravity, Scope isolation, and LLM synthesis all run as SQL over the same Postgres tables in a single transaction — all-local, $0 running cost, with a cross-tenant memory bridge. Anyone who needs web-scale vector search with managed ops and billions of embeddings should take the vector DBs; anyone who wants a self-hosted, opinionated cross-LLM memory layer without a cloud bill and without an external store should take ctx. ctx builds on pgvector, the same indexing technique that is the core of this class — but wins by integrating the entire memory layer into the DB.
Research basis & sources
Research 2026-06-17 (WebSearch/WebFetch). Versions/status: Pinecone serverless (Rust, Integrated Inference, pinecone-rerank-v0; pricing Mar–Apr 2026: $8.25/1M RU, $2/1M WU, ~$3.60/GB/mo, proprietary/no self-hosting). Weaviate open source Apache 2.0, in Go (marktechpost's "Java" claim corrected against the GitHub primary source), Cloud Flex from $45/mo, 2,000+ prod companies, 14k+ stars. Qdrant open source Apache 2.0, in Rust, v1.17 (Relevance Feedback Queries), Binary Quantization, Qdrant Edge, audit logging (Apr 2026), Series B $50M (2026-03-12, $87.8M total), 250M+ downloads, 29k+ stars, 146 employees. ctx anchor: ctx-positionierung.md (2026-06-17). Latency/pricing figures from secondary comparisons (jobsbyculture, marktechpost) — order of magnitude reliable, individual values variable by workload.
Glean is a commercial enterprise AI platform (founded 2019, Palo Alto) that bundles company-wide search, a RAG-backed assistant, and "Glean Agents" across all of a company's SaaS tools. The core idea is a "neutral intelligence layer" / enterprise knowledge graph that indexes a company's entire body of knowledge (docs, chats, tickets, code, CRM) through connectors and makes it searchable in a permissions-aware way — each user sees only what their identity-provider rights (Okta/AD/Azure AD) allow. The target audience is mid-size to very large enterprises (typically from ~100 seats up) that want a finished, managed knowledge-and-agent platform rather than a building block.
- Vendor / model
- Glean Technologies Inc., proprietary/closed-source, commercial (not open source)
- Valuation / ARR
- $7.2B valuation (June 2025, Series F $150M); ARR doubled to $200M by Dec. 2025
- Connectors
- 275+ out-of-the-box connectors (native + MCP-based + Push API), search across 100+ tools
- Retrieval
- Hybrid: lexical (BM25-style) + vector embeddings ("Scholastic", learned item embeddings) + proprietary enterprise knowledge graph
- LLM integration
- "Agentic Engine 2" (Sept. 2025), 15+ LLMs across multiple cloud providers; Search/Chat/Agents APIs, headless MCP
- Deployment
- Single-tenant cloud (Glean-hosted) · cloud-prem in your own GCP/AWS VPC · customer-managed (2026) · on-prem via Dell partnership (May 2025)
- Security/compliance
- Zero-copy (content stays at the source, only index/vectors cached), AES-256 at rest, TLS, RBAC with inherited permissions, SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001
- Pricing
- No list price, custom sales; ~$50+/user/month, min. ~100 seats (~$60k+/year ACV), Work-AI suite +~$15/user/month; fully-loaded TCO often $350k–480k/year
- Scale
- ~20 trillion tokens/year processed, >100M agentic actions/year (as of 2026)
Strengths- Broad SaaS coverage: 275+ ready-made connectors — usable immediately without writing your own ingestion code
- Permissions-aware retrieval as a first-class feature: maps IdP rights (Okta/AD/Azure) onto every connector, so a user sees only what they are entitled to — a hard enterprise compliance requirement
- Enterprise + personal knowledge graph: relationships across people, content, customers, and products, plus a personalized user/work model
- Agentic platform: a horizontal agent environment, natural-language agent building, parallel sub-agent orchestration (Agentic Engine 2)
- Multi-LLM routing (15+ models) without vendor lock-in to a single foundation model
- Enterprise maturity: SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001, zero-copy data model, cloud-prem/VPC options for data residency, a dedicated security product (Glean Protect)
- High commercial maturity: $200M ARR, $7.2B valuation, an established support/sales/onboarding apparatus
ctx +- Cost model: ctx is all-local with $0 in ongoing API/seat fees vs. Glean's ~$50+/user/month, ~100-seat minimum, and $350k–480k TCO — for individuals or small teams Glean is structurally out of reach
- True data sovereignty & self-hosting: ctx runs entirely on-prem as a single Go binary + Postgres, with llama.cpp inference local — no hosted API, no vendor in the data path. Even in its cloud-prem/customer-managed variant, Glean remains tied to Glean's code, tenant, and sales
- Open source (MPL-2.0) vs. Glean's proprietary closed-source platform — inspectable, forkable, no vendor lock-in
- Architectural frugality: hybrid fusion (GottZ 4-Way RRF: Semantic + EN-FTS + DE-FTS + Trigram), FTS, graph, and Temporal Gravity all run in ctx as SQL within ONE Postgres transaction — no separate vector store, no network hop; Glean spreads across a search index + Amazon RDS + a graph layer
- LLM-inferred LATENT links (Dream Mode, 5 types) surface non-explicit relationships — going beyond Glean's enterprise graph derived from connector metadata/identity
- Cyclic Phase Model / Temporal Gravity (7 cyclic time dimensions, Gaussian decay) as a retrieval signal — not identifiable as a standalone feature in Glean
- A cross-LLM/cross-tenant memory bridge between heterogeneous LLM instances is a ctx design goal; Glean is enterprise-internal knowledge, not conceived as a memory layer for external agents
- Complexity/footprint: a single binary running in minutes vs. a VPC deployment + IdP mapping + sales cycle
them +- Connector ecosystem: 275+ ready-made SaaS integrations vs. ctx (manual ingestion, Obsidian, Blob, API) — Glean indexes an entire company without any build-it-yourself
- Permissions-aware multi-user security at the org level: granular mapping of IdP groups/rights per connector. ctx does have a Scope model + Multi-Tenant (under construction), but no enterprise IdP integration and no document-level ACL mapping
- Scaling & SLA: proven at ~20 trillion tokens/year and thousands of users; ctx runs on a single GPU (one RTX 6000), with limited inference throughput and bulk embedding
- Compliance certifications (SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001) and a security product — formally demonstrable for enterprise procurement; absent in ctx
- Agentic platform with natural-language agent building, sub-agent orchestration, and multi-LLM routing (15+ models) as a product surface — ctx is a memory/retrieval layer, not agent orchestration
- Personal graph + enterprise memory: personalized, role-aware results per employee
- Operated as a managed service: no self-hosting effort, dedicated support/onboarding — with ctx the operator has to run everything themselves
vs. ctx Glean and ctx address overlapping problems (making knowledge findable, grounding LLMs) from opposite ends. Glean is the heavyweight, proprietary enterprise suite: 275+ connectors, permissions-aware multi-user search across the entire SaaS stack, an agentic platform, and a managed service starting at ~$60k/year and 100 seats — the right choice for a large enterprise that needs to unlock all of its company knowledge without building it itself and to respect org-wide permissions. ctx is the opposite: a self-hosted single-binary memory with $0 ongoing cost, full data sovereignty, MPL-2.0, an elegant 4-Way RRF hybrid fusion in ONE Postgres transaction plus latent links and cyclic Temporal Gravity — built as a cross-LLM/cross-tenant brain for agents and power users, not as an org search portal. Where Glean leads with connector breadth, IdP ACLs, compliance certification, and scale, ctx leads with cost, data sovereignty, inspectability, architectural frugality, and retrieval idiosyncrasies (latent links, Temporal Gravity). They barely compete for the same buyer — Glean sells to enterprise procurement, ctx serves the sovereign self-hoster.
Research basis & sources
Research date 2026-06-17 (WebSearch/WebFetch). Status: $7.2B valuation (June 2025, Series F), ARR $200M (Dec. 2025), Agentic Engine 2 (Sept. 2025, 3rd-gen assistant), 275+ connectors, 15+ LLMs, customer-managed deployment model (2026), Dell on-prem partnership (May 2025). Pricing figures are custom-sales estimates from third-party sources (CheckThat.ai, gosearch.ai, workativ), not an official list price — read them accordingly as ballpark values. Sources include glean.com (overview, connectors, security, docs.glean.com) and agentmarketcap.ai (April 2026).
LLM-native Memory-Features (ChatGPT Memory · Claude Memory & Projects · Notion AI)
LLM-native memory (proprietary, vendor-locked)Built-in, proprietary memory features from individual AI vendors — convenient and zero-setup, but each locked into its own platform; ctx, by contrast, is the vendor-neutral cross-LLM/cross-tenant bridge that connects exactly these silos.
An umbrella term for the memory features built into AI assistants, considered here as a group: OpenAI ChatGPT Memory, Anthropic Claude Memory + Projects, and Notion AI. All three learn facts and preferences about the user across sessions and automatically feed them into future responses. The target audience is end users and teams who want personalized assistants without any setup of their own. Their common structural trait: each feature lives exclusively within its vendor's platform (cloud-hosted, proprietary) — there is no open, shared store across vendor boundaries. That is precisely where ctx steps in, as a self-hosted, vendor-neutral store.
- ChatGPT Memory — two layers
- (1) Saved Memories: an explicit list of facts that can be individually viewed/edited/deleted; (2) Reference Chat History: implicit pattern recognition across all earlier chats, with NO list view (not auditable). Jan-2026 upgrade: reliable recall of details from 12+ months.
- ChatGPT 'Memory Dreaming' (June 2026)
- A single asynchronous background process synthesizes memory from many conversations at once, captures context automatically, and updates existing memories; it produces a readable 'memory summary'. Per reports, a limited audit trail. (Conceptually parallel to ctx Dream Mode.)
- ChatGPT — export gap
- The standard data export (ZIP) includes conversations but NOT a structured export of memory entries; memory is stored separately and can only be copied out manually. Account-wide, cloud-only.
- Claude Memory — availability & modes
- Available to everyone, including Free, since March 2, 2026. Two modes: (1) chat memory = a single summarized note, viewable/editable under Settings → Capabilities → Memory; (2) file-system memory = Claude writes notes into a /memory folder (agentic/Claude Code), read at session start.
- Claude Projects — silo
- Project chats have their OWN, separate memory space; standalone memory synthesizes only from standalone chats. A project's preferences/context apply only there. Splitting work across Projects and chats also splits the memory context.
- Claude 'Memory Files' (dual-mode, in testing)
- Reported May 24, 2026: distributes notes across multiple structured documents by topic/project/context (a 'personal wiki'), with greater capacity and selective consultation. Dual-mode (classic vs. file-based). Status: testing phase, no firm date. 'Dreams' consolidation in limited beta for managed agents. Cloud consumer feature.
- Notion AI — context & persistence
- Custom Instructions + instruction pages teach brand voice, team structure, and terminology; context is preserved when switching models. Since Jan 2026 it reads up to 50 pages per context window (previously 20); Custom Agents work autonomously for up to 20 min across hundreds of pages; it also pulls context from Slack, Google Drive, and Teams.
- Notion AI — pricing & data sovereignty (2026)
- Free $0 · Plus $10 · Business $20/user/month (AI bundled) · Enterprise custom. Custom Agents since May 4, 2026 priced by credits ($10 / 1,000 credits). Data Residency (EU/Japan/Korea) + zero data retention with LLM providers ONLY in the Enterprise tier. Cloud SaaS; an OSS self-host alternative would be AppFlowy (third party).
- Common denominator
- All three: cloud-hosted, proprietary, vendor-locked, with ongoing subscription/token costs (beyond Free limits). Memory is NOT portable across vendors — migrating ChatGPT↔Claude is possible only via manual copy or experimental import tools (Claude import 'experimental' since March 2026).
Strengths- Zero setup, usable instantly — no infrastructure, no operations, built directly into the respective assistant.
- Seamless, invisible integration into your own chat/workspace flow (the ChatGPT/Claude UI or Notion pages).
- Automatic, incidental capture of context without the user having to actively save anything (ChatGPT Dreaming, Claude auto-summary).
- Persistence across model switches within the platform (Notion AI: 'switch models, your memory stays').
- Huge reach and constant ongoing development from the major vendors; deep integration into tools (Notion: Slack/Drive/Teams).
- Editability/deletability of explicit entries (ChatGPT Saved Memories, Claude chat memory) gives end users simple control.
ctx +- Vendor-neutral & cross-LLM/cross-tenant: ctx is ONE shared store spanning multiple Claude instances AND Anthropic tenants (and, prospectively, third-party LLMs via the OpenAI wire protocol) — the proprietary features each lock memory into their own platform.
- No silos: ChatGPT memory, Claude Projects, and the Notion workspace are separated from one another AND internally (Projects vs. chats); ctx keeps a single searchable memory with a Scope model (private/hth/shared) instead of fragmented islands.
- Self-hosted & full data sovereignty: runs entirely on-prem (your own GPU, your own PostgreSQL) — no data with OpenAI/Anthropic/Notion; data residency is the default here, not an Enterprise surcharge as with Notion.
- $0 ongoing cost instead of subscription/token billing (Notion: $10/1,000 credits; ChatGPT/Claude Pro plans).
- Full transparency & portability: every Block is retrievable via CLI/API/MCP, exportable, and versioned — vs. ChatGPT's non-exportable, partly non-auditable 'chat history' layer.
- Open architecture: documented retrieval (4-Way RRF, cross-encoder reranking, cyclic-temporal Gravity, latent Dream links), MPL-2.0 open source, an MCP server with 5 remote tools — the vendor features are black boxes.
- A structured Zettelkasten with explicit Scope/tags/categories and blob storage, instead of a single summarized note (Claude classic) or an opaque list of facts (ChatGPT).
them +- Zero setup vs. running ctx: end users need no GPU, no PostgreSQL, no Docker — ctx demands self-hosting know-how and hardware (a single-RTX-6000 bottleneck).
- Fully automatic, incidental capture with no user effort at all; ctx relies on deliberate saving or hooks/ingestion.
- Deep native embedding in the respective assistant UI — no tool-call/MCP round trip needed, memory is part of the product itself.
- Mature consumer-scale operation & availability (Free tiers, mobile apps, multi-region infra) — ctx is a one-person open-source project.
- Notion AI: broad native app connectors (Slack, Google Drive, Teams) and 20-minute autonomous agents across hundreds of pages — ctx is a memory/retrieval layer, not a workspace agent.
- Claude 'Memory Files' bring a topic-/project-organized wiki and the Claude /memory filesystem directly into the agentic loop, with no external store.
- Mature, continuously improved recall over months (ChatGPT's 12+-month upgrade), backed by large research/operations budgets.
vs. ctx The three are not direct competitors but rather the silos that ctx aims to bridge: convenient, built-in memory within a SINGLE proprietary cloud platform each — ChatGPT account-wide (but partly opaque/non-exportable), Claude isolated per project, Notion per workspace. ctx is the counter-model: a vendor-neutral, self-hosted store that shares the same memory across Claude instances, tenants, and prospectively third-party LLMs, with full data sovereignty, $0 ongoing cost, open documented retrieval (4-Way RRF, reranking, latent links), and export/versioning. The price for that is operational overhead and the lack of zero-setup convenience — the proprietary features win on convenience, reach, and native UI embedding, while ctx wins on sovereignty, cross-boundary coverage, and transparency. Notably, ChatGPT's 'Memory Dreaming' (asynchronous background synthesis) and Claude's 'Dreams' are conceptual parallels to ctx's Dream Mode — the industry is moving toward ctx's ideas, but stays closed and platform-bound.
Research basis & sources
Research as of 2026-06-17 (WebSearch June 2026). Version/release status: ChatGPT Memory — 'Memory Dreaming' update (async synthesis, limited audit trail) June 2026, 12+-month recall since Jan 2026, memory still not in the standard export. Claude Memory — available to everyone including Free since March 2, 2026; 'Memory Files' dual-mode in testing phase (reported May 24, 2026, no firm date), 'Dreams' in limited beta. Notion AI — Plus $10 / Business $20 (AI bundled) / Enterprise custom; Custom Agents priced by credits ($10/1,000) since May 4, 2026; 50-page context since Jan 2026; Data Residency EU/JP/KR Enterprise-only. Uncertain/not conclusively established (W3/W9): the exact internal mechanics of ChatGPT's audit-trail limitation (primary source TechTimes returned 403 via WebFetch, only a search snippet available); the hosting model of Claude Memory Files (the source gives no details, presumably cloud-only).