Head to head
Phi Guard vs Robert Blust
Same numbers we show everywhere else, lined up. Ratings come from users, the grade comes from our scanner, adoption comes from public registries.
No reviews yet
Local-first PHI detection for source code, LLM prompts, logs, and analytics
Full listing
The short version
Neither has been reviewed yet, so the comparison rests on the scan and the public usage numbers. The safety scan favours Phi Guard (92/100 against 67). Robert Blust is hosted and callable through the gateway; Phi Guard runs on your own machine. Phi Guard has noticeably more public adoption.
| Phi Guard | Robert Blust | |
|---|---|---|
| User rating | No reviews yet | No reviews yet |
| Safety grade | A92/100 | C67/100 |
| Adoption | Growing | New |
| GitHub stars | 0 | – |
| Downloads / week | 80 | – |
| Runs where | Your machine (local) | Hosted (remote) |
| Gateway-ready | No | Yes |
| Tools | — | 7 |
| Write actions | — | — |
| Price per call | Free | Free |
| Licence | MIT | — |
| Last release | 2026-09-18 | — |
| Category | AI and agents | AI and agents |