NanoClaw vs OpenClaw
How the two compare on price, platforms, what they can act on and how they ask before acting. Facts come from each agent's sources page.
| NanoClaw | OpenClaw | |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | NanoCo | OpenClaw Foundation |
| Cheapest paid plan | Free | Free |
| Free tier | Yes: free and open source under the MIT license; model provider usage may cost money | Yes: the software is free and open source under the MIT license; the site states there is no subscription, hosted tier or paid version, and model provider usage is billed by the provider |
| Platforms | macOSLinuxWindows (WSL2)Self hostedWhatsAppTelegramDiscordSlackMicrosoft TeamsMattermostiMessageSignalMatrixGoogle ChatWebexEmail | macOSWindowsLinuxiOSAndroidSelf hostedWhatsAppTelegramSlackDiscordiMessageSignalMicrosoft TeamsMatrix |
| Can act on | MessagesEmailBrowserFilesCode | EmailCalendarBrowserMessagesFilesCode |
| Approval model | Agents run in isolated containers and never see real credentials; an OneCLI credential gateway checks user defined policies and pauses sensitive outbound requests until the user approves them through a native card in the chat app. The FAQ also lists egress lockdown, mount rules and sender policies. | Configurable. Host commands run only when tool policy, the allowlist and optional user approval agree; modes are deny, allowlist, ask, auto and full. The docs state the default is security full with ask off on gateway and node hosts, and deny on sandbox hosts, so prompting depends on configuration. Approval prompts can be answered in the companion apps, the Control UI or supported chat channels. |
| Launched | Jan 31, 2026 | Nov 2025 |
| Last update | Oct 9, 2026: NanoClaw 2026.10.0 | Oct 15, 2026: openclaw 2026.10.4 |
See sources on the NanoClaw and OpenClaw pages.
Track both every week