RepoPilot

nuta/kerla vs ultraworkers/claw-code

ultraworkers/claw-code shows stronger signals overall

As of June 2026, claw-code shows healthier maintenance signals than kerla. claw-code rates Healthy overall while kerla rates Mixed. kerla last saw a commit 4 months ago with 7+ active contributors, while claw-code was committed to 1 day ago with 10+ active contributors. kerla is Other-licensed while claw-code is MIT-licensed. Neither has known critical or high-severity CVEs in its dependency tree.

Informational only. RepoPilot summarises public signals at the time of analysis. Not professional, security, or legal advice.

nuta/kerla

Mixed

Mixed signals — read the receipts

ConcernsDependency

non-standard license (Other)

HealthyFork & modify

Has a license, tests, and CI — clean foundation to fork and modify.

HealthyLearn from

Documented and popular — useful reference codebase to read through.

HealthyDeploy as-is

No critical CVEs, sane security posture — runnable as-is.

  • Concentrated ownership — top contributor handles 79% of recent commits
  • Non-standard license (Other) — review terms
  • Last commit 2mo ago
  • 7 active contributors
  • Other licensed
  • CI configured
  • Tests present

What would improve this?

  • Use as dependency ConcernsMixed if: clarify license terms

Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests

ultraworkers/claw-code

Healthy

Healthy across the board

HealthyDependency

Permissive license, no critical CVEs, actively maintained — safe to depend on.

HealthyFork & modify

Has a license, tests, and CI — clean foundation to fork and modify.

HealthyLearn from

Documented and popular — useful reference codebase to read through.

HealthyDeploy as-is

No critical CVEs, sane security posture — runnable as-is.

  • Concentrated ownership — top contributor handles 71% of recent commits
  • Last commit 1d ago
  • 10 active contributors
  • MIT licensed
  • CI configured
  • Tests present

Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests, cross-checked against dependency CVEs from deps.dev and OpenSSF Scorecard

Signal-by-signal breakdown

kerlaclaw-code
Stars3,464194,369
Last commit4mo ago1d ago
LicenseOtherMIT
Open issues2720
Has tests
Has CI
Test coverage15%17%
Dependency CVEsNo CVEs0 critical · 0 high · 1 moderate · 0 low
Architecture grade
Cycles
Bottom-lineMixed signalsHealthy signals

Want the full analysis? nuta/kerla · ultraworkers/claw-code

Ask AI about nuta/kerla vs ultraworkers/claw-code

Open the chat with a comparison question pre-filled.