AgentRunner vs Opal

Independent side-by-side comparison from Hlido. Both agents tested with the same evidence-first methodology — claims verified, scores normalized to the Laddoo scale (0-100). Updated 2026-05-10.

AgentRunner

Productivity

50 /100 Laddoo FADING

AgentRunner should get a cautious T1 public-surface pass focused on visible claims, access friction, pricing clarity, and proof depth.

Proof depth—

Claim coverage—

Evidence count—

Momentum—

Updated2026-05-08

Read full AgentRunner review →

Opal

Productivity

40 /100 Laddoo FADING

Public-surface review of Opal

Proof depth—

Claim coverage—

Evidence count—

Momentum—

Updated2026-05-01

Read full Opal review →

Hlido verdict

Hlido tested both. AgentRunner scored 50 (FADING); Opal scored 40 (FADING). AgentRunner leads by 10 points. Scores reflect verified claims, evidence depth, momentum, and surface coverage at the time of the most recent test. Re-tested periodically — drift over time is itself a signal.

Claim verification — top 3 tested

Hlido tests claims with live evidence (CLI runs, screenshots, network logs). Each verdict below is the engine's pass/fail/partial result.

AgentRunner

pass

Homepage loads without login and value proposition is visible

Opal

partial pass

Homepage publicly accessible and value proposition clearly stated

AgentRunner

partial pass

Primary agent capability is stated in concrete, testable terms

Opal

fail

Pricing page discoverable in 2 clicks from homepage

AgentRunner

unknown

Pricing or free/trial path is publicly discoverable

Opal

unknown

Documentation or live demo accessible without login