Comparisons / Haystack vs LlamaIndex
Haystack vs LlamaIndex: Which Agent Framework to Use?
Haystack vs LlamaIndex, head to head
Haystack 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.
Haystack by deepset is a framework for building NLP and LLM pipelines.
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 Haystack if
Pick Haystack if haystack earns its complexity when you're building RAG pipelines with multiple retrieval stages, document processing, and production deployment needs. But for straightforward agents with a few tools, the plain Python version is simpler to write and debug. The tradeoffs in its intro should match how your team already thinks about agents; LlamaIndex will feel like translation if they don't.
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; Haystack will feel like translation if they don't.
By the numbers
By the numbers
Haystack
24.7k
2.7k
Python
Apache-2.0
2019-11-14
deepset
LlamaIndex
48.3k
7.2k
Python
MIT
2022-11-02
Jerry Liu
GitHub stats as of April 2026. Stars indicate community interest, not necessarily quality or fit for your use case.
| Concept | Haystack | LlamaIndex |
|---|---|---|
| Agent | `Agent` component with `ChatGenerator`, tool definitions, and message routing | `AgentRunner` with `AgentWorker`, or `ReActAgent` for tool-calling agents |
| Tools | `Tool` dataclass with function reference, name, description, parameters schema | `FunctionTool` for custom tools, `QueryEngineTool` to query an index as a tool |
| Pipeline Architecture | `Pipeline()` with `add_component()` and `connect()` — a directed graph of typed components | — |
| RAG / Retrieval | `DocumentStore` + `Retriever` + `PromptBuilder` + `Generator` wired in a `Pipeline` | — |
| Memory | `ChatMessageStore` with `ConversationMemory` component in pipeline | `ChatMemoryBuffer` with token limit, or custom memory modules |
| Deployment | Pipeline YAML serialization, `Hayhooks` REST server | — |
| 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 |
| Orchestration | — | `AgentRunner` step API for custom control flow, or multi-agent pipelines |
Or build your own in 60 lines
Both Haystack 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 →