
Work Here?
CrewAI provides a platform to design, deploy, and manage teams of AI agents that automate complex business workflows. It uses an open-source framework that harnesses large language models to enable collaborative agent teams that can handle tasks end-to-end. The system composes multiple agents into crews, assigns performance metrics, and offers real-time dashboards, alerts, and controls for observability and governance across back-office processes like report summarization and onboarding. Its enterprise edition adds stronger security, scalability, and management tools, positioning it against competitors by emphasis on multi-agent orchestration and auditable automation at scale.
Industries
Data & Analytics
Enterprise Software
AI & Machine Learning
Company Size
51-200
Company Stage
Series A
Total Funding
$12.5M
Headquarters
São Paulo, Brazil
Founded
2023
See people who can refer or advise you
Help us improve and share your feedback! Did you find this helpful?
Total Funding
$12.5M
Below
Industry Average
Funded Over
1 Rounds
Industry standards
Company Equity
Flexible Work Hours
Remote Work Options
Professional Development Budget
Crew Studio launches with native Arize AX tracing and evaluation. Published august 13, 2026. Co-Authored by Richard Young, Director, Partner Solutions Architecture & Jesse Miller, VP of Product, CrewAI. CrewAI has launched Crew Studio, the Automated Agent Builder. Through a native Arize AX integration, teams can send traces from Studio to Arize from the first run without adding custom instrumentation code. Builders and platform teams can then inspect agent behavior, evaluate quality, identify failures, and test improvements before redeploying. What is Crew Studio. Crew Studio is a new building layer for agentic systems. It is designed to bridge a familiar gap in enterprise agent development: visual tools can become limiting as workflows grow more complex, while code-first frameworks may be inaccessible to the domain experts closest to the underlying business process. Studio brings those workflows together across four stages: * Discover. A discovery module helps teams identify which agent use cases are worth building, grounded in patterns from real deployments rather than guesswork. * Build. Teams describe the system they want, and Studio turns that into a working architecture: agents, tasks, tools, models, flows, memory, and MCP connections. The output is informed by more than 700,000 patterns and architectures from billions of executions on the CrewAI platform. * Own. You own what gets built. Download the code, modify it, extend it, and move from visual building to code without starting over. * Run. Deploy to the same CrewAI AMP infrastructure your engineers already use, with governance, security, cost controls, and deployment paths attached. Business teams can build while platform teams can stay in control. Why observability has to be there from the start. Studio will put agent building in the hands of many more people. That's the point. But it also means more agents in production, built by people who may never open the underlying code. When one of those agents misbehaves, someone has to answer what happened, which step failed, what it cost, and whether the fix worked. That's the gap this integration closes. Studio and AMP give teams traces, cost visibility, and governance in the same environment where agents are built and deployed. Arize AX adds a dedicated evaluation layer on top: online evals against live traffic, labeling queues, ground truth datasets, and experiments to validate a fix before it ships. Traces from every Studio deployment can land in Arize, where teams get span-level visibility into each agent run, latency and token cost breakdowns, and agent graphs that show how the system actually behaves in production. Visibility is only the first step. Arize runs online evaluations against live traffic, so quality issues surface as they happen instead of when a user complains. Flagged traces route to labeling queues where human reviewers turn them into ground truth datasets. Those datasets feed experiments to test fixes before they ship. The resulting feedback loop is straightforward: trace, evaluate, label, improve, redeploy. Every production run adds evidence that makes the next version better. Built on OpenTelemetry standards. This integration works because of a capability Arize announced recently: native support for the OpenTelemetry GenAI semantic conventions, alongside OpenInference. Arize AX can ingest those traces directly and also supports applications instrumented with OpenInference semantic conventions. To connect the platforms, configure Studio with Arize's OTLP endpoint and authentication headers. No custom tracing code is required. Because the integration uses open telemetry standards, teams retain flexibility across frameworks, models, and observability backends. How to connect Crew Studio to Arize AX. Connecting Crew Studio to Arize AX requires only a few configuration steps. 1. In Arize AX, go to Settings | API Keys. Copy your Space ID and create or copy an API key. 2. In CrewAI, go to Settings | Organization | OpenTelemetry Collectors, click Add Collector, and select OpenTelemetry Traces.
Open-source AI frameworks 2026: why community matters more than the benchmark winner. LangGraph, CrewAI, AutoGen and Dify are running a head-to-head race in 2026 for dominance in the open-source agent stack. The framework teams choose is increasingly decided by community signals, not benchmark tables. Why framework choice in 2026 is more than a benchmark comparison. Anyone running an AI agent in production in 2026 will end up on an open-source framework. LangGraph, CrewAI, AutoGen, Dify and a growing set of specialised alternatives ship releases, forks and maintainer changes every week. For decision-makers in small and mid-sized businesses, the choice has become both more confusing and more consequential. Migrating off a framework after it has reached production is expensive, because architecture, observability, tooling and, not least, internal skills all have to be rebuilt. The obvious question is: which framework wins the current benchmarks? The honest answer is that no one knows reliably, and that it is not the most important question. The production-relevant question is which framework has a community that, over the next three to five years, will keep shipping maintenance, security patches, integrations and answers on Stack Overflow. The four open-source heavyweights at a glance. Recent comparisons consistently place the field into four notable clusters. LangGraph has become the reference for production-grade graph workflows over the past twelve months. Teams that need deterministic state machines with clearly defined transitions find the most mature model here. Integration into the LangChain ecosystem brings advantages around vector databases, retrievers and evaluation tooling, but also inherits the complexity of LangChain's abstractions. CrewAI positions itself as the role-based multi-agent framework. The idea: agents take on clearly defined personas (researcher, writer, reviewer) and work together as a small team. The on-ramp is gentle, the learning curve steepens noticeably when workflows grow complex. The community has expanded strongly in recent months, driven mainly by solo developers and small agencies. AutoGen from Microsoft Research remains the reference for conversation-driven multi-agent systems, in which agents dynamically decide who speaks next. Its strength is flexibility; its weakness is behavioural predictability. Teams that need to build compliance-critical workflows struggle more with AutoGen. Dify takes a different approach: a low-code platform with an open-source core, a visual workflow editor and a commercial cloud variant. For SMEs with limited engineering capacity, the visual editor is often the decisive advantage. The trade-off: dependence on the vendor roadmap and the fact that critical performance optimisations often land in the commercial variant first. Beyond those four, specialised frameworks such as Microsoft Agent Framework (formerly Semantic Kernel with an agent layer), LlamaIndex for RAG-heavy setups, and a growing set of libraries built around MCP or A2A protocols are all in play. Anyone starting today is making the choice against the backdrop of a fragmented, fast-moving ecosystem. What "benchmark winner" really means. The comparisons that surface regularly ask which framework delivers the highest success rate on tool-use benchmarks, multi-step reasoning or cost-per-task. Results swing by ten or more percentage points depending on the benchmark setup. Anyone who orients around the table leader risks having to switch again at the next release wave. A second point is often glossed over in those comparisons: benchmarks measure isolated capabilities, not real production operation. A framework that scores 85 percent on tool-use success in a controlled test environment can behave very differently in production with real API latencies, transient network errors and hallucinations. What the benchmark counts is not what wakes your operations engineer at three in the morning. Third, benchmarks change faster than the productive installed base. A team that builds its architecture on framework X because X leads the GAIA benchmark may, six months from now, find that the X maintainers have shipped a behind-the-scenes refactor that breaks the API. With commercial frameworks, that is a vendor lock-in risk. With open source, it is a maintenance lock-in risk. Three signals that indicate a healthy community. If the benchmark does not decide, what does? In its view, three signals indicate whether an open-source community will carry a framework through the next product cycle. Release cadence and patch speed. An active community publishes regular minor releases, reacts quickly to security advisories, and closes reported bugs within days, not months. If you see twelve months without a significant release, maintenance is at risk. If you see many rapid major releases without a migration path, API stability is at risk. The healthy middle ground is predictable release cycles with clear deprecation warnings. Contribution diversity and maintainer distribution. A project carried more than half by one person or one organisation is a single point of failure. Look at how many external contributors have shipped commits in the last twelve months, how distributed the maintainer role is, and whether there is a visible RFC process for larger changes. Frameworks with ten active maintainers across five organisations are more resilient than frameworks with three maintainers from one company. Density of secondary resources. A living community produces more than just code. Tutorials on dev.to and Medium, example workflows on GitHub, discussions on Discord and Reddit, answers on Stack Overflow, blog posts on concrete use cases. If you can find five useful hits for a concrete problem (for example, "multi-agent with memory across sessions" or "integration with a German ERP"), the community is productive. If you only find the official docs, it is not. What this means for the concrete choice. centerbit UG recommend that SMEs treat the framework choice not as a technical decision but as a supplier decision. Three questions help structure the discussion. How critical is lock-in? Starting with an open-source framework gives you a migration option that commercial platforms do not offer. That option is valuable, but not free: it costs the discipline of keeping your own workflows framework-agnostic and of not embedding critical business logic in framework-specific constructs. Teams that cannot or do not want to maintain that discipline are often better served by a commercial offering. What skills exist on the team? CrewAI and Dify have lower entry barriers; LangGraph and AutoGen demand more engineering maturity. Choosing against the team's skills leads either to overwhelm or to dependence on the one or two people who do master the framework. Assess realistically, do not orient on wishful thinking. How critical is predictability? Compliance-driven workflows that need to meet GDPR, the EU AI Act or sector-specific regulation need deterministic behaviour and traceable audit logs. Here LangGraph with its graph state machine is often the better choice over conversation-driven frameworks, where agent paths are hard to reproduce. Teams that require EU data residency should additionally check whether the framework can be operated on-premise or in EU clouds without third-country transfers in the default configuration. The uncomfortable truth: the framework is the smallest variable. In its customer projects centerbit UG regularly observe that the biggest performance and stability lever is not framework choice but the quality of prompt design, tool definitions and memory strategy. Two teams using the same framework can end up in completely different places in practice, depending on how much care they invest in tool-call architecture, intermediate-result validation and HITL approvals. Choosing a framework without simultaneously building a discipline for observability, evaluation and continuous prompt engineering is buying a fast car without brakes. The choice will, for the foreseeable future, play a smaller role than the question of whether your own team brings the operational excellence that every productive AI workflow demands. centerbit UG therefore recommend limiting the framework choice to a maximum of two weeks, during which a small, realistic pilot is implemented with two of the candidate frameworks. What emerges in that pilot phase, in terms of friction, magic and operator frustration, says more about medium-term viability than any benchmark comparison. Book a consultation now. If you see similar manual work in your team, centerbit UG can review the process together in a free initial consultation.
LangGraph vs CrewAI - which should you learn? Two leading frameworks. Two very different mental models. Pick the wrong one and you'll spend more time fighting the framework than shipping the agent. Here's how to decide which one to learn first. LangGraph treats your agent as A state machine. LangGraph (from the LangChain team) is opinionated about one thing: your agent is a graph of nodes connected by edges, and execution moves through it based on state. You define the nodes (steps), the edges (transitions), and the conditions that pick which edge to take. Then LangGraph runs the graph. The mental model is closest to React + Redux - explicit state, explicit transitions, replayable. The big wins: * Checkpointing - pause an agent mid-run, fix the state, resume from where it stopped * Human-in-the-loop - interrupt the graph at any node and hand control to a human * Time-travel debugging - replay any run step-by-step via the LangGraph Studio UI * Streaming intermediate steps as a first-class concern It's the framework you reach for when "what state is my agent in right now?" is the question you'll be asking at 2am. CrewAI treats your agent as A team of specialists. CrewAI is opinionated about a completely different thing: agents collaborate by playing roles, like a team. You define each agent's role ("Researcher", "Writer", "Critic"), its goal, and its toolbelt. Then you describe a process - sequential, hierarchical, or consensus - and CrewAI orchestrates the hand-offs. The mental model is closest to a Slack workgroup. You don't define the graph; you define the people in the room and let them figure it out. The big wins: * Role-playing shapes agent behaviour without complex prompting * Process primitives (sequential, hierarchical, consensus) compose cleanly * Flows API for the parts of your system that need to be deterministic * CrewAI Studio - a low-code UI for non-engineers to wire crews together It's the framework you reach for when your problem decomposes naturally into "a planner does X, a researcher does Y, a writer does Z". The practical difference. Buildrlabs use both at BuildrLabs, and the rule of thumb is this: LangGraph for control, CrewAI for collaboration. If your agent has 8 distinct steps and the branching between them is what makes it hard, use LangGraph. The state machine model maps directly to what you'd draw on a whiteboard. If your agent is fundamentally "specialists hand work to each other", use CrewAI. You'll waste less time wiring orchestration and more time tuning each role's prompt and toolbelt. Where they overlap. Both frameworks have: * Provider-agnostic LLM clients (Claude, GPT, Gemini, open-weights) * Tool-use primitives that work with any function * Tracing integrations (LangSmith for LangGraph, native for CrewAI Enterprise) * Async + streaming support So your model and tool layer is mostly portable between them. What's not portable is your orchestration code. What Buildrlabs use in production. For client projects Buildrlabs has shipped this year, the split is roughly: * Single-agent workflows with branching | LangGraph (~60% of jobs) * Multi-specialist crews | CrewAI (~30%) * Custom orchestration on top of model SDKs directly | ~10%, when latency dominates The Agentic AI Bootcamp covers both. Module 3 teaches LangGraph end-to-end (state, checkpoints, HITL); Module 4 layers in CrewAI for the multi-agent capstone. How to pick if you're learning both from scratch. Start with LangGraph. It forces you to think about state - which is the thing that breaks most production agents. Once you've internalised state-graph thinking, CrewAI's abstractions feel like sugar, not magic. Spend a weekend building the same agent in both. The contrast is the lesson.
Konecta and CrewAI partner to transform operations with Agentic AI. Madrid, November 3rd 2025 - Konecta, a global leader in customer experience (CX) and digital services, today announced a strategic alliance with CrewAI, the pioneering multi-agent orchestration platform. Together, the two companies will redefine how humans and AI agents collaborate, integrating human expertise, CX excellence, and AI to deliver measurable business outcomes across every interaction. Under this partnership, Konecta will also serve as CrewAI's lead consulting and implementation partner in Europe and Latin America, combining strategic advisory with delivery excellence to help companies design, pilot, and scale agentic orchestration. Empowering processes with agentic automation. CrewAI's platform allows organizations to coordinate multiple specialized AI agents working collaboratively to execute complex, end-to-end business processes. This orchestration transforms how organizations operate, allowing them to automate workflows that traditionally required multiple human touchpoints. For instance, a commercial proposal can now be generated automatically, from understanding the client's context, developing a storyline and creating presentation slides, to generating pricing models, all coordinated seamlessly by a "crew" of AI-powered agents. This partnership lays the foundation for Konecta's Agentic AI model approach: a unified and structured environment to design, orchestrate, and scale autonomous agents across customer and enterprise operations. Built on CrewAI's Agent Management Platform (AMP), it will enable Konecta and its clients to industrialize agentic use cases rapidly and securely. Proven impact and operational transformation. The collaboration creates dual value, as the same model powers Konecta's solutions portfolio across industries including Banking, Financial Services & Insurance (BFSI), Retail, Telecommunications, and Utilities, while simultaneously optimizing Konecta's internal operations in HR, Finance, Procurement, and Legal. For example, in employee onboarding, once a new hire signs a contract, a crew of AI agents automatically extracts the necessary information, issues credentials and badges, allocates IT equipment, and generates a personalized onboarding schedule. This streamlining not only saves time, but allows human teams to focus on more strategic and creative tasks. A recent initiative also illustrates this potential: by leveraging CrewAI's framework, Konecta automated the Voice Agent testing process for a leading food ordering service. By orchestrating 1,000 end-to-end test conversations across 60 real-world scenarios, the company achieved a 96% reduction in QA cycle time, from 74 hours to just three. To run all CrewAI-related initiatives, Konecta has a dedicated Centre of Excellence that will develop and certify CrewAI competencies across teams and ensure the consistent deployment of agentic automation across the company's business units. Konecta expects 30% to 40% of its customer base to benefit from CrewAI integration in the coming year, transforming CX and operational agility alike. Leading the way in Europe and Latin America. Under this partnership, Konecta will act as CrewAI's consulting and implementation partner in Europe and Latin America. This role reflects Konecta's long-standing leadership in delivering enterprise-scale CX transformation and digital operations across both continents. By combining strategic insight with robust delivery capabilities, Konecta will help organizations design, pilot, and scale agentic AI solutions with confidence and agility. Any organisation interested in CrewAI's capabilities in these strategic regions will benefit from Konecta's consulting and implementation expertise, from initial assessment through to full operational deployment. "Agentic AI marks a fundamental shift in how businesses operate. It's not about replacing people, but about amplifying human intelligence through governed, data-driven orchestration," said Nourdine Bihmane, CEO of Konecta. "CrewAI's platform enables us to unite human expertise, CX excellence, and responsible AI into a single, intelligent ecosystem that drives continuous optimization and measurable impact. Together, we're setting a new global benchmark for scaling intelligent operations built on trust, transparency, and purpose." "CrewAI enables enterprises to quickly put AI agents into production so businesses can see their clear benefits, with agentic systems that are easy to use, trusted by design, and ready to scale," said João Moura, CEO and Founder of CrewAI. "Konecta embodies that same philosophy. With their operational depth and experience, and our technology, we're turning the promise of intelligent operations into tangible, measurable reality, built for scale and built to last." About crew AI. CrewAI is the leading enterprise platform for multi-agent systems, used by 60% of the U.S. Fortune 500 and a global community of developers in 150+ countries. The platform enables organizations to deploy collaborative groups of AI agents to automate real-world business workflows. CrewAI provides the infrastructure that teams need to run agentic systems in production with a complete list of features required by enterprises that include pro and low code tools, user management with RBAC and audit logs, governance, and security. CrewAI integrates with all major LLMs, hyperscalers (AWS, Azure & Google Cloud), and many enterprise applications, giving teams the freedom to orchestrate across any environment. With the launch of CrewAI AMP - the first Agent Management Platform - teams can now build, optimize, deploy and scale agent-led workflows enterprise-wide with speed, control, trust, and governance. About Konecta. Konecta is a leading innovative global service provider in customer management business process outsourcing, with 120,000 passionate employees working in 30 languages across 4 continents and 26 countries. Focusing on the unique needs and opportunities of each industry, Konecta offers a full range of end-to-end customer management solutions - including acquisition, retention, customer service, technical support, and collection - all based on a sustainable business model. These services are built on a portfolio of world-class expertise covering customer experience and process management, digital solutions and cutting-edge technologies. Headquartered in Madrid, Konecta delivers global revenues of approximately €2 billion with more than 500 clients, covering some of the biggest names in telecoms, energy, banking, mobility, retail, and e-commerce.
CrewAI: your ai-powered team productivity assistant. CrewAI is an intelligent AI assistant designed to help teams streamline their workflows, manage tasks efficiently, and enhance overall productivity. By automating repetitive tasks, summarising meetings, and assisting with communication, CrewAI ensures teams remain aligned and focused on what matters most. It's ideal for project managers, remote teams, and businesses looking to simplify collaboration and save valuable time. Competitor comparison. CrewAI competes with other AI collaboration tools such as Zapier. | Tool | Strengths | | CrewAI | Automates meeting summaries, task tracking, and team updates | | Zapier | Connects 8,000+ apps for no-code workflow automation | Pricing & user base. At the time of writing CrewAI provides a free plan with basic functionalities, while premium plans start at around USD $25/month per user, offering advanced AI features. Primary Users: Small to medium teams, remote workers, project managers, and knowledge workers. Difficulty level. Easy - CrewAI's intuitive interface makes it simple for teams to adopt and start using immediately without a steep learning curve. Use case example. Imagine you manage a marketing team with multiple campaigns running simultaneously. CrewAI can: * Summarise meeting notes and action items automatically * Draft emails, reports, or project updates in your preferred tone * Track tasks, deadlines, and progress efficiently By automating these tasks, CrewAI reduces manual workload, keeps teams aligned, and ensures important details are never overlooked. Pros and cons. * Automates repetitive team tasks * Improves collaboration and communication * Saves time on meetings, emails, and reporting * Quick to adopt with user-friendly interface * Some advanced features require a paid subscription * Limited integrations compared to enterprise-level solutions * Internet connection required for AI functionality Integration & compatibility. CrewAI works seamlessly with popular tools including: * Google Workspace (Docs, Calendar, Gmail) * Slack and Microsoft Teams * Asana, Trello, and Jira This ensures teams can maintain existing workflows while leveraging AI automation. Support & resources. * Detailed user guides and tutorials * Live chat and email support * Community forums for sharing tips and best practices If you want to explore how AI can accelerate your growth, consider joining a Nimbull AI Training Day or reach out for personalised AI Consulting services.
Find jobs on Simplify and start your career today
Industries
Data & Analytics
Enterprise Software
AI & Machine Learning
Company Size
51-200
Company Stage
Series A
Total Funding
$12.5M
Headquarters
São Paulo, Brazil
Founded
2023
Find jobs on Simplify and start your career today