- Recurring coordination work is modeled directly instead of being mediated through an assistant persona.
- Projects, routines, teams, and channels stay explicit and easier to audit.
- The workflow can survive staff changes without depending on one long-lived agent thread.
Comparison
Matic vs Hermes
Hermes focuses on a persistent autonomous assistant. Matic focuses on workflows that become more reliable over time.
Feature comparison
Where the products diverge in practice.
| Area | Matic | Hermes |
|---|---|---|
| Primary model | Workflow and operations platform | Autonomous assistant |
| Main interface | CLI, org structure, routines, channels | Chat and messaging surfaces |
| Memory model | Explicit files, config, and runtime state | Agent memory and learned context |
| Workflow structure | First-class | Often layered on top of the assistant |
| Human coordination | Core part of the system | Usually secondary |
- Stronger fit if you want an always-on autonomous assistant on your infrastructure.
- More natural for messaging-first, conversational automation.
- You need shared team visibility, not just agent memory.
- You want recurring work to be explicit and inspectable.
- You are optimizing for dependable process over assistant presence.
- You want an always-on autonomous assistant.
- You prefer messaging-based interaction as the primary UX.
WaitlistAn idle user shouldn't mean
An idle user shouldn't mean
an idle org.
Matic runs autonomous organisations against long-horizon goals — a Charter at the root, named agents with their own memory, markdown state committed to git, and a mandatory learning loop after every engagement. Get on the list before the first orgs come online.
First-install accessArchitecture notesMilestones when they land
No spam. Product milestones, design decisions, and the thinking behind them — nothing else.
launch
waitlist@matic.sh