Comparison

Agentastic vs Conductor

Conductor and Agentastic are direct overlaps: both run multiple Claude-Code-style agents in parallel git worktrees on macOS. Conductor is purpose-built around Claude Code orchestration. Agentastic supports 30+ different CLI agents, ships a built-in editor and browser, and includes diff review and multi-provider code review out of the box.

Who should choose each option

Agentastic

Choose Agentastic if you want to run more than just Claude Code, plus an editor / browser / diff viewer in the same window.

Conductor

Choose Conductor if Claude Code is your only agent and you want a focused tool around it.

Feature comparison

AgentasticConductor
Supported agents30+ (Claude Code, Codex, Gemini, Cursor CLI, Junie, OpenHands, Aider, Cline, etc.)Claude Code first; smaller surface
Worktree-per-agentYesYes
Built-in editorYesNo (open in external)
Built-in browserYesNo
Built-in code reviewYes — Claude / Codex / CodeRabbitDiff only
Container isolation optionYes (Docker)Worktrees only
Bundle size~25 MB nativeNative macOS

Pricing

Agentastic

Free.

Conductor

Free.

Using them together

You can run both, but most teams pick one — they cover the same surface. Agentastic is the broader workspace; Conductor is the Claude-Code-focused option.

Frequently asked questions

Is Agentastic a fork of Conductor?

No. They are independent projects that converged on the worktree-per-agent pattern.

Can Agentastic run Claude Code with the same isolation as Conductor?

Yes. Each Claude Code instance in Agentastic runs inside its own git worktree with optional Docker container isolation.

Which one supports more agents?

Agentastic ships 30+ built-in agent integrations and a custom-agent slot for any terminal-based tool. Conductor focuses on Claude Code.