Heartwood vs Zep — provable memory vs managed temporal graphs
Entity split: “Zep” is the managed Cloud/BYOK/BYOC product; Graphiti is the separate self-hosted Apache-2.0 engine. They differ on license, deployment, and controls, and this page keeps them distinct. Managed Zep is not embedded.
TL;DR
Zep builds temporal Context Graphs that track when facts become valid or are superseded, with documented RBAC, audit logging, retention, and multi-tenant isolation, and a vendor-claimed sub-200ms-at-scale retrieval figure. Heartwood is governance-first at the record level: signed memories, policy-before-ranking, and a re-executable key-destruction proof. Choose Zep for managed temporal graphs at enterprise scale; choose Heartwood when you must prove governance per record and re-run the proof.
At-a-glance table
| Axis | Heartwood Memory | Zep |
|---|---|---|
| Governance granularity | Per individual memory record | Account/project RBAC across managed Context Graphs; Enterprise adds audit, retention, customer-key controls |
| Provenance signing | Per-record Ed25519, fail-closed read | Not evaluated in public docs (Graphiti traces derived facts to episodes) |
| Tamper-evident audit | Hash-chained audit log | Not evaluated in public docs (API logs = complete audit trail) |
| Policy-before-ranking | Yes | Not evaluated in public docs (authorization documented across queries) |
| Erasure / RTBF | Crypto-shred + key-destruction proof | Single-operation user deletion removes threads, artifacts, user graph (no cryptographic proof) |
| Tenant isolation | Yes | Yes — multi-tenant isolation + project-scoped RBAC |
| Interface | Python library + governed MCP server | Managed API (Python/TS/Go SDKs); Graphiti separate OSS engine + MCP server |
| Deployment | Self-hosted, embedded | Zep Cloud / Cloud+BYOK / BYOC; Graphiti separate self-hosted OSS engine |
| License | Source-available (BSL 1.1); 0.1.x MIT | Graphiti + getzep/zep repo Apache-2.0; managed Zep engine proprietary |
| Pricing | Free / Team $349·mo / Pro $6,000·yr (early access) | Free trial / Flex $1,250·yr / Flex Plus $3,750·yr / Enterprise custom |
| Best-for | Record-level, re-executable proof | Managed temporal Context Graphs, enterprise scale, documented governance |
“Not evaluated in public docs” = not found in Zep's current primary documentation as of 2026-07-15; it is not a claim the feature is absent. Vendor pricing reverified immediately before publish.
Comparison by dimension
Governance
Zep documents strong platform governance — account/project RBAC, audit, retention, multi-tenant isolation, BYOK/BYOC. Heartwood's difference is granularity and provability: policy on each record, enforced before ranking, re-verifiable by you.
Temporal vs proof
Zep's edge is temporal Context Graphs — tracking when facts change and superseding old ones. Heartwood's edge is cryptographic proof per record. Different jobs; pick by which you need.
Entity & license
Don't conflate the two Zep surfaces: Graphiti and the getzep/zep repo are Apache-2.0; the managed Zep Context Graph Engine is proprietary. Heartwood's core is source-available BSL 1.1.
Who Zep is best for
Teams wanting managed temporal Context Graphs at enterprise scale with documented governance and flexible deployment (Cloud/BYOK/BYOC).
Who Heartwood is best for
Regulated teams that need per-record proof and want to self-host and re-execute it.
Can Heartwood run underneath Zep?
Heartwood can act as the governed store behind shape-compatible memory calls (example contract, not an official integration).
See the governed-memory modelFAQ
Does Zep have governance?
Yes — Zep documents RBAC, audit logging, retention, and multi-tenant isolation. Heartwood's difference is per-record, re-executable proof, not “governance vs none.”
Is Zep open source?
Graphiti and the getzep/zep repository are Apache-2.0; the managed Zep Context Graph Engine is proprietary.