Comparisons / AutoGen vs LlamaIndex

AutoGen vs LlamaIndex: Which Agent Framework to Use?

AutoGen vs LlamaIndex, head to head

AutoGen and LlamaIndex both let you build an agent, but they sit in different parts of the stack and they assume different things about who's writing the code.

AutoGen by Microsoft models agents as ConversableAgents that chat with each other.

LlamaIndex started as a RAG framework — connect your data, query it with an LLM.

Underneath, both wrap the same thing: a model call, a tool dispatch, a loop. The decision is about which abstraction your team wants to think in day to day, and which ecosystem you're willing to inherit along with it. There's an honest, framework-free version of the same pattern in about 60 lines of Python in the lesson at the bottom of this page — useful as a baseline regardless of which framework wins.

Pick AutoGen if

Pick AutoGen if autoGen excels at complex multi-agent workflows where agents need to debate or collaborate. For single-agent use cases or simple tool-calling agents, the plain Python version is significantly simpler. The tradeoffs in its intro should match how your team already thinks about agents; LlamaIndex will feel like translation if they don't.

Full AutoGencomparison →

Pick LlamaIndex if

Pick LlamaIndex if llamaIndex adds genuine value when your agent needs to query structured or unstructured data as part of its reasoning — that's the index-as-tool pattern, and it's well-executed. But if you're building a general-purpose agent that doesn't need RAG, the agent framework is overhead. The plain Python version of the agent loop is the same 60 lines either way. The tradeoffs in its intro should match how your team already thinks about agents; AutoGen will feel like translation if they don't.

Full LlamaIndexcomparison →

What both add

Whichever you pick, you're inheriting a dependency tree and a vocabulary your team has to learn before they ship anything. AutoGen has its own class hierarchy and tool registration conventions; LlamaIndex has its. Either way, when something misbehaves you'll be reading framework source before you reach the actual HTTP call.

If the real workload is one model and a handful of tools, both can feel like a workbench for driving a nail. The lesson below builds the same pattern in plain Python — useful as a comparison point even if you ultimately keep the framework.

By the numbers

By the numbers

AutoGen

GitHub Stars

56.7k

Forks

8.5k

Language

Python

License

CC-BY-4.0

Created

2023-08-18

Created by

Microsoft Research

github.com/microsoft/autogen

LlamaIndex

GitHub Stars

48.3k

Forks

7.2k

Language

Python

License

MIT

Created

2022-11-02

Created by

Jerry Liu

github.com/run-llama/llama_index

GitHub stats as of April 2026. Stars indicate community interest, not necessarily quality or fit for your use case.

ConceptAutoGenLlamaIndex
Agent`ConversableAgent` with `system_message`, `llm_config``AgentRunner` with `AgentWorker`, or `ReActAgent` for tool-calling agents
Tools`register_for_llm()` and `register_for_execution()``FunctionTool` for custom tools, `QueryEngineTool` to query an index as a tool
ConversationTwo-agent chat with `initiate_chat()`, message history
Multi-Agent`GroupChat` with `GroupChatManager`, speaker selection
Nested Chats`register_nested_chats()` for sub-task handling
Termination`is_termination_msg` callback, `max_consecutive_auto_reply`
Agent Loop`AgentRunner.chat()` manages step-by-step execution via `AgentWorker` tasks
RAG Integration`VectorStoreIndex` + `QueryEngineTool` — the agent can query your data as a tool call
Memory`ChatMemoryBuffer` with token limit, or custom memory modules
Orchestration`AgentRunner` step API for custom control flow, or multi-agent pipelines

Or build your own in 60 lines

Both AutoGen and LlamaIndex implement the same 8 patterns. An agent is a function. Tools are a dict. The loop is a while loop. The whole thing composes in ~60 lines of Python.

No framework. No dependencies. No opinions. Just the code.

Build it from scratch →