Bench test · AI Search
Komo AI vs SearXNG
Same rack, same rubric, four independent agents. Here's how they measure up — and which we'd pick.
| Komo AI | SearXNG | |
|---|---|---|
| consensus | score5.5/10 | score5.3/10 |
| agents won | 2 / 4 ▲ | 1 / 4 |
| from | Free | Free |
| free tier | yes | yes |
| category | AI Search | AI Search |
Agent panel — head to head
| Anthropic | 6.2 | 6.2 |
| OpenAI | 6.4 | 6.8 ▲ |
| Gemini | 6.5 ▲ | 5.5 |
| Grok | 2.8 ▲ | 2.5 |
Komo AI
- ✓More natural, conversational interaction than traditional search
- ✓Provides synthesized answers with source citations
- ✓Fast, relevant results in chat format
- —May hallucinate or provide inaccurate information occasionally
- —Limited customization compared to specialized search tools
- —Smaller search index than established search engines
Conversational search interfaceReal-time web search integrationDirect answer generationCitation and source attributionNatural language query processingMulti-turn conversation support
SearXNG
- ✓Strong privacy protection with no user profiling
- ✓Transparent, auditable open-source codebase
- ✓Less dependent on any single search provider
- —Slower results due to multiple backend queries
- —Less personalized than commercial search engines
- —Smaller user base means fewer community resources
Aggregates results from 70+ search enginesNo tracking or data retentionCustomizable search filters and preferencesSelf-hostable open-source codeAnonymous query forwardingMultiple language and region support
Free · free tier
Try Komo AI ▸Free · free tier
Try SearXNG ▸Verdict
Komo AI takes it — 5.5 to 5.3 (a photo finish).
The panel gave Komo AI the edge on 2 of 4 agents. It's close enough that SearXNG is a fair pick if it fits your workflow better.