OmO vs Trigger.dev
Side-by-side comparison of two AI agent tools
Short answer
- OmO is growing faster: +810 GitHub stars in the last 30 days vs +130 for Trigger.dev.
- Pick OmO for: omO: Just type "mass ulw" keyword with your prompt. Pick Trigger.dev for: trigger.dev – build and deploy durable AI agents and workflows.
From GitHub data refreshed daily.
O
OmOopen-source
OmO: Just type "mass ulw" keyword with your prompt. Now you are the master of graph engineering.
T
Trigger.devopen-source
Trigger.dev – build and deploy durable AI agents and workflows
Metrics
| OmO | Trigger.dev | |
|---|---|---|
| Stars | 69.8k | 16.5k |
| Star velocity /mo | 810 | 130 |
| Commits (90d) | 9.7k | 713 |
| Releases (6m) | 10 | 10 |
| Downloads (30d, npm + PyPI) | 91.7K | 2.9M |
| Overall score | 0.8973547831718989 | 0.7330060666473396 |
FAQ
- Which is more popular, OmO or Trigger.dev?
- OmO has more GitHub stars (69,768 vs 16,458).
- Which is more actively developed, OmO or Trigger.dev?
- OmO had more commits in the last 90 days (9,692 vs 713).
- Should I use OmO or Trigger.dev?
- Compare their capabilities, limitations and "best for" notes above. Both are open source, so trying each on a small task is the fastest way to decide.