Registry › Compare › ClawRouter vs LLM Gateway

ClawRouter vs LLM Gateway

Both are Grade C and 3.1 points apart, so choose on what you weigh most. ClawRouter leads on adoption; LLM Gateway leads on supply-chain integrity and transparency.

C ClawRouter 60.3

The agent-native LLM router for autonomous agents. Every frontier model behind one wallet, <1ms local routing, USDC payments on Base & Solana via x402.

BlockRunAI/ClawRouter · #678 overall · #9 LLM Gateways & Infra · coverage C (2/5)

Choose ClawRouter if adoption matters most.

+1.4Adoption: 6.6k GitHub stars against 1.7k

C LLM Gateway 63.4

Route, manage, and analyze your LLM requests across multiple providers with a unified API interface.

theopenco/llmgateway · #581 overall · #8 LLM Gateways & Infra · coverage C (2/5)

Choose LLM Gateway if supply-chain integrity and transparency matter most.

+4.0Safety / Integrity: 100% of recent commits signed, against 46%
+0.9Transparency: OSSF Scorecard 6.1 against 5.0

Where they differ

8.6

Safety / IntegrityLLM Gateway +4.0

12.6

12.8

TransparencyLLM Gateway +0.9

13.7

19.9

MaintenanceLLM Gateway +0.1

20.0

9.2

AdoptionClawRouter +1.4

7.8

-1.0

Runtime calibrationClawRouter +0.5

-1.5

1 dimension identical: Identity 10.8 · Full evidence table

An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of ClawRouter and LLM Gateway, two LLM Gateways & Infra projects in the HVTracker registry. Scores come from public, checkable signals — supply-chain provenance, OSSF Scorecard, maintenance, and adoption — not popularity.

Full evidence

Signal	ClawRouterBlockRunAI/ClawRouter	LLM Gatewaytheopenco/llmgateway
HVTrust score	60.3	63.4
Evidence grade	C	C
Coverage grade	C	C
Overall rank	#678	#581
Rank in LLM Gateways & Infra	#9	#8
GitHub stars	6.6k	1.7k
Last updated	today	today
Build provenance	No	No
OSSF Scorecard	5.0 / 10	6.1 / 10
License	MIT	NOASSERTION
Downloads	—	—
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25	8.6	12.6
Identity & provenance / 18	10.8	10.8
Transparency / 17	12.8	13.7
Maintenance / 20	19.9	20.0
Adoption / 20	9.2	7.8
Runtime capability surface (full matrix)
MCP server	—	Declared
External providers	1 — DeepSeek	2 — OpenAI, Postgres
Requires API keys	Yes	Yes
Plugin surface	—	—
Provenance drift	—	—

Open in the live compare tool → ClawRouter profile LLM Gateway profile More LLM Gateways & Infra →

How to read this: HVTrust (0–100) weighs supply-chain signals (provenance, OSSF Scorecard, signed commits, open license) alongside real-world adoption, scaled by an evidence-confidence factor. Grade bands: A ≥ 80, B ≥ 65, C ≥ 50, D < 50. Signals refresh daily. Full methodology v4.4 →