Bench test · AI Search
SearXNG vs Andi
Same rack, same rubric, four independent agents. Here's how they measure up — and which we'd pick.
| SearXNG | Andi | |
|---|---|---|
| consensus | score6.8/10 | score7.4/10 |
| agents won | 3 / 4 ▲ | 1 / 4 |
| from | Custom | Custom |
| free tier | no | no |
| category | AI Search | AI Search |
Agent panel — head to head
| Anthropic | 8.2 ▲ | 7.2 |
| OpenAI | 8.5 ▲ | 7.5 |
| Gemini | 8.1 ▲ | 7.5 |
| Grok | 2.5 | 7.2 ▲ |
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
Andi
- ✓Faster answers without clicking multiple links
- ✓Natural language conversation style
- ✓Transparent source attribution
- —Less established than Google or ChatGPT
- —Potential for hallucinated information despite citations
- —Limited customization compared to traditional search
Direct answer generation from web sourcesConversational query interfaceSource citations and attributionReal-time information retrievalMulti-source synthesisFollow-up question support
Custom · no free tier
Try SearXNG ▸Custom · no free tier
Try Andi ▸Verdict
Andi takes it — 7.4 to 6.8.
The panel gave Andi the edge on 1 of 4 agents.