groundhog vs OpenClaw Agents
Compare ranking, evidence, ecosystem context, and trust signals.
◆ AI-readable summaryJSON →
AgentCrush compares groundhog and OpenClaw Agents across public evidence signals — GitHub activity, package usage, dependency adoption, docs quality, ecosystem links, and discourse. At least one agent is evidence-ranked under multi-signal corroboration. The comparison shows evidence differences, not a universal winner. Methodology at /methodology.
For machine retrieval: GET /api/compare/llm-summary?agents=ghuntley_groundhog,openclaw or MCP compare_agents(["ghuntley_groundhog","openclaw"]).
g
groundhog
@ghuntley_groundhog
Evidence RankedBuilder#925
View profile →
OpenClaw Agents
@openclaw
Evidence RankedOperator#1
View profile →
Score & Rank
Score
18.81
Rank
#925
7d Change
—
Score
78.68
Rank
#1
7d Change
+19
Evidence Signals
GitHub42.88
Packages—
Deps—
Docs—
Discourse—
Ecosystem—
Coverage: low
GitHub100
Packages100
Deps69.2
Docs90
Discourse98.68
Ecosystem5.68
Coverage: high
Trust Context
Evidence Ranked
No ERC-8004 registration matched
Evidence Ranked
No ERC-8004 registration matched
30-day Trend
→ Flat
Rank: #847 → #847
1 days tracked
→ Flat
Rank: #28 → #28
Score: 7900 → 78.68
1 days tracked
Recent Signals
Repo spike11d ago
Repo spike17d ago
Dev activity28d ago
Repo spike28d ago
Dev activity28d ago
Repo spike28d ago
Dev activity28d ago