a3m-router vs otari
Self-hosted LLM gateways compared
a3m-router and otari are self-hosted gateways that route LLM requests across providers through compatible APIs. a3m-router emphasizes model selection, caching, and parallel ensembles, while otari focuses on team access controls, budgets, and usage tracking.
a3m-router: Route LLM Requests Across Providers
A3M Router is a self-hosted gateway that routes OpenAI-compatible chat requests among multiple LLM providers based on request complexity and cost. It also offers provider failover, semantic caching, and parallel ensembles for teams seeking control over model choice and routing.
otari: Run an OpenAI-Compatible LLM Gateway
Otari is Mozilla AI’s self-hostable LLM gateway, using any-llm to route OpenAI- and Anthropic-compatible requests to providers through one endpoint. It adds virtual keys, budgets, routing policies, and usage tracking for teams operating their own AI stack.
| a3m-router | otari | |
|---|---|---|
| Language | TypeScript | Python |
| License | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| Stars | 16 | 660 |
| Forks | 5 | 83 |
| Last analyzed | Oct 10, 2026 | Oct 19, 2026 |
Key differences
- a3m-router is written in TypeScript and uses the MIT license; otari is written in Python and uses Apache-2.0.
- a3m-router offers heuristic and ML-based routing, semantic caching, and optional parallel ensembles; otari offers routing policies for failover, weighting, and learned selection.
- a3m-router provides an OpenAI-compatible endpoint; otari provides OpenAI- and Anthropic-compatible endpoints.
- a3m-router describes support for 80+ providers, while otari describes support for 40+ providers.
- otari includes virtual keys, budget checks, usage records, and a dashboard; a3m-router highlights routing tools such as route previews, provider health checks, and benchmarking.
- The supplied repository figures list 16 stars and 5 forks for a3m-router, compared with 503 stars and 59 forks for otari.
Choose a3m-router if you…
- need semantic caching or optional parallel ensembles.
- want heuristic or ML-based routing with CLI tools for route previews and provider health checks.
- prefer a TypeScript project under the MIT license.
Choose otari if you…
- need scoped virtual keys, budget controls, or usage tracking for teams.
- want an OpenAI- and Anthropic-compatible endpoint with a dashboard for gateway administration.
- prefer a Python project under the Apache-2.0 license.
Compare the numbers side by side, or add more projects
This comparison is generated with AI from the OSRepos analyses of both projects. Always check each project's repository and documentation before choosing.