Ralph Workflow vs Conductor OSS: Durable Agent Orchestration vs Software Workflow

Conductor OSS focuses on enterprise-grade workflow orchestration for AI agents. Ralph Workflow is a free open-source composable loop framework for autonomous coding runs that aims to end in finished, tested code you can review.

They solve related problems, but they are optimized for different jobs.

At a Glance

| Ralph Workflow | Conductor OSS
What it is | Operating system for autonomous coding: free open-source composable loop framework and AI orchestrator | Enterprise-grade workflow orchestration for AI agents
License | AGPL (source) / CC0 (outputs) | Apache 2.0
Setup | TOML config files, no cloud required | Varies
Vendor lock-in | None — own your config | Varies
Primary use case | Unattended coding runs with a reviewable finish | Durable agent execution across broader orchestration use cases

Key Differences

Conductor OSS is built around durable execution, provider breadth, and enterprise-style orchestration primitives. Ralph Workflow is built around a simpler question: how do you hand off a software task, walk away, and come back to something you can actually review and merge?

Ralph Workflow is the better choice when you want:

A simple Ralph-loop core composed into planning, development, verification, and follow-up

A strong default workflow for writing software

Cost control via model routing across workflow phases

A workflow you can use as-is or extend without rebuilding the core

Conductor OSS is the better choice when you want:

Durable execution for broader agent systems

14+ LLM providers

Vector DB support inside the platform

Infrastructure-oriented orchestration primitives

Feature Comparison

Feature | Ralph Workflow | Conductor OSS
Multi-agent orchestration | ✅ | ⚠️
Claude Code integration | ✅ | ❌
OpenCode / Codex integration | ✅ | ❌
Cost model routing | ✅ | ❌
Unattended execution | ✅ (built for it) | ⚠️
Policy-defined config (TOML) | ✅ | ❌
Checkpoint / resume | ✅ | ⚠️
MCP support | ✅ | ✅
Parallel work units | ✅ | ✅
Open source | ✅ | ✅
Self-hosted | ✅ | ✅

Why the Software Workflow Layer Matters

Conductor OSS is a stronger fit if your problem starts with infrastructure and durable execution.

Ralph Workflow is a stronger fit if your problem starts with software delivery: define the task, run the work, verify the result, and come back to a clear finish state instead of a vague claim that the agent is done.

That is the distinction Ralph Workflow keeps pushing on. The gap is not just orchestration. It is whether the workflow ends in a result a developer would trust the next morning.

When You'd Use Both Together

These two tools solve complementary problems at different layers of the stack. Conductor OSS is built for enterprise infrastructure orchestration — durable execution, provider breadth across 14+ LLMs, and production-grade scheduling. Ralph Workflow is built specifically for the software-delivery feedback loop: planning, development, verification, follow-up.

A team could reasonably run Conductor OSS as their infrastructure-level agent platform and point specific Ralph Workflow instances at it. Conductor handles the operational concerns (retries, queue management, multi-model load distribution). Ralph Workflow handles the software-delivery-specific concern: did the code actually finish in a state you'd be willing to merge?

Try Ralph Workflow

pipx install ralph-workflow
cd /path/to/your/project
ralph --init
$EDITOR PROMPT.md # write your task
ralph # walk away

Ralph Workflow runs on your own machine. It works with Claude Code, Codex, and OpenCode. The default workflow handles planning, development, verification, and follow-up — or you can compose your own.

Install guide → · Quick start → · Primary Codeberg repo → · GitHub mirror: github.com/Ralph-Workflow/Ralph-Workflow