Iris vs Promptfoo
A side-by-side comparison of Iris and Promptfoo, two Eval tools, drawn from Ignaite's continuously-verified listings.
Compared from listings verified as of
At a glance
| Attribute | Iris | Promptfoo |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Eval | Eval |
| Pricing (differs) | FREEMIUM | FREE |
| License (differs) | Open core | Open source |
| Deployment (differs) | Hybrid | — |
| Platforms (differs) | API | CLI, macOS, Windows, Linux |
| Model support | BYO key / model | BYO key / model |
| Vendor (differs) | Iris | Promptfoo |
| Capabilities (differs) |
|
|
The honest brief
Iris
MCP-native: every output through the protocol is scored automatically with no SDK or instrumentation, rather than wiring evals into your code.
- No SDK or instrumentation to add
- Free self-host, free cloud tier
- Trace logging and LLM-as-judge scoring
- PII, injection, and cost checks
- Newer, niche MCP-focused tool
- Best fit for MCP-based agents
- Smaller ecosystem than SDK evals
Promptfoo
Define evals in plain YAML and run one goldset across models in CI — a prompt regression fails the build like any other test.
- YAML-driven, version-controllable evals
- Runs in CI, model-agnostic
- Goldsets and rubric scoring
- Also does red-teaming/security scans
- CLI-first, less of a hosted UI
- Teams may want managed dashboards
- Config sprawl on large eval suites
When to pick which
Across the signals we compare, Iris and Promptfoo differ on pricing, license, and platforms:
- Pricing
- FREEMIUM · FREE
- License
- Open core · Open source
- Platforms
- API · CLI, macOS, Windows, Linux
Their capability lists differ in recorded depth — compare the full lists above before deciding.