Skip to content

RD-Agent vs UFO

Which should you use? A side-by-side look at what each one does, who it suits, what it costs, how hard it is to set up, and where each falls short.

RD-Agent

Open source · MIT

An AI agent framework that automates parts of data science and R&D work, such as ML competitions and quant res

UFO

Open source · MIT

Open-source Windows agent that uses an LLM to operate desktop apps, and a multi-device orchestration layer cal

The short answer

Choose RD-Agent if you need…

  • Researchers who want to test automated ML engineering agents on benchmark-style tasks
  • Data scientists exploring agent-driven model and feature development
  • Quant researchers interested in automated factor and strategy research
  • Teams comparing LLM backends for autonomous experimentation

Choose UFO if you need…

  • Developers experimenting with LLM-driven Windows desktop automation
  • Researchers studying multi-agent task orchestration
  • People who want to automate repetitive tasks in Windows apps and are comfortable with setup
  • Teams exploring cross-device workflows, using the Galaxy framework

Side-by-side

RD-AgentUFO
TypeAI model / agentAI model / agent
PriceFree and open sourceFree and open source
LicenceMITMIT
GitHub stars15.2k10.2k
Setup difficultyAdvancedAdvanced
How you get itInstall with a package managerClone and build from source
Main languagePythonPython
Last code update16 days ago6 days ago

What each one is

RD-Agent

R&D-Agent is a Microsoft open-source framework that uses large language model agents to automate research and development tasks, with a focus on data and models. The README describes it as letting AI drive data-driven AI work. The README also shows it applied to machine learning engineering benchmarks (MLE-bench) and to quantitative trading strategy research (RD-Agent(Q)).

UFO

UFO³ is a Microsoft research project for building AI agents that control Windows computers and coordinate work across several devices. Its older part, UFO², runs on a single Windows machine and uses a language model to read the screen and act on apps through clicks and API calls. The newer Galaxy part splits a request into a graph of tasks and assigns them to different devices, such as Windows, Linux, or Android, as described in the README.

Best for

RD-Agent

  • Researchers who want to test automated ML engineering agents on benchmark-style tasks
  • Data scientists exploring agent-driven model and feature development
  • Quant researchers interested in automated factor and strategy research
  • Teams comparing LLM backends for autonomous experimentation

UFO

  • Developers experimenting with LLM-driven Windows desktop automation
  • Researchers studying multi-agent task orchestration
  • People who want to automate repetitive tasks in Windows apps and are comfortable with setup
  • Teams exploring cross-device workflows, using the Galaxy framework

Strengths

RD-Agent

  • Backed by Microsoft Research with linked technical report and peer-reviewed papers cited in the README
  • Documented benchmark results on MLE-bench, with run details published online
  • Supports multiple LLM providers through LiteLLM, per the README

UFO

  • Open source under the MIT license with a public paper and documentation site
  • Two tiers: UFO² is described as simpler and stable, while Galaxy adds multi-device orchestration
  • Combines GUI actions with API calls, which the README says can reduce LLM calls

Not ideal for

RD-Agent

  • People wanting a simple, ready-made app with no setup, since the README describes Python packages, documentation, and configuration rather than a finished end-user product
  • Users who need results without paying for LLM API usage, since the agents rely on language model backends
  • Non-Linux users, since the PyPI badge lists the platform as Linux

UFO

  • Non-technical users wanting a ready-made consumer app, since the README describes setup and configuration steps
  • Anyone needing a stable, fully tested production system, because the README labels Galaxy as in active development
  • Users who need macOS-only automation, since the README lists Windows, Linux, and Android as supported device types

Trade-offs

RD-Agent

  • Results and costs depend on the LLM backends used, and the README reports benchmark numbers with standard deviations rather than guarantees
  • Installation and configuration details were not fully visible in the truncated README, so setup may take effort
  • Some scenarios are limited; the web UI currently excludes the data_science scenario

UFO

  • Depends on a language model and its API access, which the README discusses but this summary does not detail
  • Galaxy setup is described as moderate in difficulty, and it is still in active development
  • Primary focus is Windows, so cross-platform reach depends on the Galaxy device options

Getting started

RD-Agent

Install from PyPI (package named in badge)

pip install rdagent
Step-by-step guide: how to use RD-Agent

UFO

Clone the repository

git clone https://github.com/microsoft/UFO.git
Step-by-step guide: how to use UFO

Frequently asked questions

What is the difference between RD-Agent and UFO?

RD-Agent: An AI agent framework that automates parts of data science and R&D work, such as ML competitions and quant res. UFO: Open-source Windows agent that uses an LLM to operate desktop apps, and a multi-device orchestration layer cal. RD-Agent suits researchers who want to test automated ml engineering agents on benchmark-style tasks, while UFO suits developers experimenting with llm-driven windows desktop automation.

Are RD-Agent and UFO free?

RD-Agent: Free and open source. UFO: Free and open source.

Is RD-Agent or UFO more popular?

RD-Agent has more GitHub stars (15.2k) than UFO (10.2k). Popularity isn't the same as fit — check which one matches your use case above.

What are other alternatives to RD-Agent and UFO?

Other options people compare them with include Open Deep Research, DeerFlow, SWE-agent, Open SWE, Self-Operating Computer.

Keep comparing

Built from our catalogue entries for both products: open-source details come from each project's README (AI-assisted, refreshed weekly) and GitHub data; AI-tool details are editorial. Spotted something wrong? Let us know from either product's page.