Alma by Olivares.AI vs Persnally

Alma by Olivares.AI and Persnally are both personal assistants tracked by AIDiveForge. Below is a side-by-side comparison of pricing, capabilities, platforms, and ownership — sourced from each tool's live website and verified before publishing.

Alma by Olivares.AI

Alma, built by Olivares.AI, addresses that amnesia by pairing an AI assistant with persistent episodic memory that carries learned patterns, project context, and style preferences across sessions. The core workflow bundles text, image, video, and music generation under a single budget, so multi-modal creative projects don't require juggling five separate tool subscriptions. Background agents handle scheduled tasks — monitoring, reports, research — without you staying at the keyboard. The integration story extends to developer tools like Cursor, VSCode, and any MCP-compatible client, letting teams share a memory layer across their existing stack. Where it gets harder: teams needing on-premise data control find no self-hosted path, and the free tier gates most memory and agent features behind paid access.

Persnally

The setup is a single npm install and an import command that reads your Claude exports, Claude Code sessions, and git repos, then builds a structured, evidence-linked profile in ~/.persnally. From there, a local daemon serves that profile over MCP so Claude, Cursor, Copilot, and other connected tools load your conventions and preferences at session start without you repeating them. Per-client scopes let you decide exactly what each tool can see. The architecture is the trust model — context never leaves your machine, deletions erase source events and rebuild all derived views with no residue. Where it breaks: any tool that does not speak MCP stays out of the loop, and teams using proprietary AI integrations without MCP support get nothing from this.

Attribute	Alma by Olivares.AI	Persnally
Pricing	Paid	Free
Price	$14/mo	—
Free trial	14 days	No
Open source	No	Yes
Has API	Yes	No
Self-hosted option	No	Yes
Platforms	Web app, VSCode extension, MCP server, REST API	macOS, Linux, Windows (Node 20+)
Released	2025	—
Pros	Persistent episodic memory carries project context, learned patterns, and style preferences across sessions, so you stop re-explaining your workflow every time you open a new chat. Multi-modal generation (image, video, music) under a unified budget, which means creative projects don't require maintaining separate subscriptions and billing accounts for each medium. Background agents execute scheduled research, monitoring, and reporting tasks autonomously, so recurring work runs without you initiating each cycle manually. MCP-compatible API exposes the memory layer to Cursor, VSCode, and other developer tools, which means persistent context moves with you across your existing stack instead of staying siloed in a chat interface. BYOK integration lets developers route through their own API keys, so teams with high volume can cap costs at the provider level rather than absorbing per-seat markup.	Learns your stack, conventions, and preferences from existing AI history on import, so you stop re-explaining the same context at the start of every new session across different tools. Serves context over MCP — the protocol already adopted by Claude, Cursor, Copilot, and others — which means no custom plugin per tool; one daemon serves all connected clients. Per-client scopes let you control exactly what each AI tool is allowed to read, so a scoped agent gets a narrower view than your primary coding assistant without manual prompt filtering. Provenance-complete profile means every inferred trait links to the source events that produced it, so you can audit what the tool thinks it knows and why rather than treating it as a black box. Deletion erases source events and rebuilds all derived views from zero — no soft deletes or hidden residue — which means removing a topic actually removes it from everything downstream.
Cons	No self-hosted deployment option exists — teams subject to data residency requirements or internal compliance mandates cannot keep data on their own infrastructure, and this is the condition under which they switch to an open-source alternative like Open WebUI or a self-managed LangChain stack. Advanced memory features and autonomous agent scheduling are gated behind paid tiers, so free-tier users hit the feature ceiling before they can evaluate whether the memory system actually fits their production workflow. The memory and style-learning system requires sustained use across multiple sessions to accumulate useful context — teams expecting useful personalization from day one will find the first few sessions feel like any other stateless assistant.	Any AI tool that does not implement MCP cannot call get_context and receives no context at all — teams whose primary tools lack MCP support get zero benefit from the daemon, and at that point they are back to manual context pasting or switch to a tool with a native memory feature built into the vendor's platform. The profile is only as accurate as the history you can import; the page names Claude exports, Claude Code sessions, and git repos as sources, so workflows living in other tools — Slack threads, Jira tickets, proprietary IDEs without export — contribute nothing until an import path exists for them. Running a persistent local daemon adds a process to maintain across machine restarts and OS updates; teams on locked-down corporate machines or shared development environments without npm global install rights hit a setup wall before the tool does anything useful.

Bottom line

Alma by Olivares.AI is paid while Persnally is free; Persnally is open source; only Alma by Olivares.AI exposes a public API. Choose based on which difference matters most for your workflow.

Frequently asked questions

What is the difference between Alma by Olivares.AI and Persnally?

Alma by Olivares.AI is Paid, while Persnally is Free and open source. Compare pricing, free trial, API, platforms, and pros/cons in the table above on AIDiveForge.

Is Alma by Olivares.AI better than Persnally?

It depends on your workflow. Use the side-by-side attributes (pricing, open source, API, self-hosted, platforms) to decide. AIDiveForge does not rank a universal winner — we publish verified facts so you can choose.