Compare / vs Zep

Open-core coding continuityvs enterprise graph memory.

Zep and Graphiti build a powerful temporal graph for enterprise governance. Zephr builds portable, scoped continuity for coding agents. The overlap is provenance, and it is a genuine overlap — the divergence is deployment model, primary abstraction, and who the product is for.

Snapshot · July 2026ADR-Z-16sourced 2026-07-24

Shared ground

Both start from provenance.

Zephr and Zep/Graphiti agree on the premise that most of this market does not: memory without provenance is unsafe. Both trace beliefs back to source episodes, code references, and session context.

Provenance-first memory
Both products treat an unsourced memory as a liability. Every derived belief traces back to the episodes that produced it.
Source-episode lineage
Code references, session context, and worktree metadata are carried with the record rather than reconstructed on demand.
Temporal truth models
Both encode that a fact was true over an interval, not merely that it is true now — which is what makes historical questions answerable.
Governance primitives
Roles, policies, and audit are treated as core concerns rather than as an enterprise add-on bolted onto a retrieval layer.

Divergence

Enterprise graph vs coding continuity.

The two products diverge on deployment model, primary abstraction, and the workflows they were built to optimise. None of these rows is a defect on either side — they are different design centres.

Dimension	Zep / Graphiti	Zephr
Primary model	Temporal knowledge graph	Evidence graph with worktree overlays
Deployment	Enterprise-focused offering	Local-first SQLite, managed cloud planned
Open-core	No — enterprise licensing	Yes — local SQLite, no account required
Coding continuity	General-purpose graph memory	Worktree and branch deltas, signed handoff packets
Cross-client	Closed enterprise integration	MCP-native across connected agents

Rows reflect public positioning as of July 2026 and will move as both products develop.

Where Zep wins

Zep's graph model is more mature for enterprise governance.

Zephr does not claim to out-graph Zep. If your workload is enterprise RBAC, temporal facts, and governance audit across a large organization, Zep/Graphiti is the more mature choice today and we would rather say so here than have you find out later.

Zep / GraphitiStronger here

Where the graph model leads

Mature temporal graph model, proven at organizational scale
Enterprise governance and RBAC as a shipped, supported product
Source-episode lineage already exercised for governance audit

ZephrStronger here

Where the continuity layer leads

Coding-specific continuity: worktrees, branch overlays, handoff
Open-core, local-first deployment with no account required
Evidence receipts as durable, inspectable objects

Comparison reflects public positioning as of July 2026.

Decision framework

Choose Zep or Zephr?

Pick the product whose primary abstraction matches your primary workflow. A graph you do not query is overhead, and a continuity layer you never switch tools inside is too.

Choose Zep / Graphiti if…

You need temporal graph queries, enterprise RBAC, and governance audit across a large organization — and an enterprise-focused deployment model is a fit rather than an obstacle.

Choose Zephr if…

You want portable coding continuity, local-first deployment, and evidence receipts that survive moving between Claude Code, Cursor, Copilot, and other agents mid-task.

See how continuity works.

The golden path covers install, scope admission, provenance-backed recall, and signed handoff — the parts of the story a graph model alone does not answer.

How it works All comparisons