Compare
Vanna AI vs Wren AI
Both are open-source, self-hostable text-to-SQL engines; Vanna trains on schema and example queries, Wren AI needs a governed semantic model defined first.
Side by side
| Vanna AI | Wren AI | |||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vendor | Vanna AI | Canner (Wren AI) | ||||||||||||||||
| Pricing model | Free tier + paid plans | Free tier + paid plans | ||||||||||||||||
| Free tier | Yes | Yes | ||||||||||||||||
| Deployment | Cloud, Self-hosted | Cloud, Self-hosted | ||||||||||||||||
| Open source | Yes (MIT) | Yes (AGPL-3.0) | ||||||||||||||||
| Best for | Engineering teams that want a self-hostable, open-source text-to-SQL engine they can train on their own schema. | Engineering teams that want an open-source, self-hostable semantic layer under their AI agents rather than a closed SaaS. | ||||||||||||||||
| Pricing | Open-source library is free to self-host with your own LLM; Vanna Cloud is a per-month subscription metered by daily question volume, plus a custom-priced Enterprise tier.
Prices read from the vendor's own page on September 21, 2026. Vendors change prices; check the source before you budget. | Free open-source CLI/engine with no UI; hosted Cloud plans are credit-metered monthly subscriptions, and self-hosted Enterprise Plus is custom-quoted with session-based licensing.
Prices read from the vendor's own page on September 21, 2026. Vendors change prices; check the source before you budget. | ||||||||||||||||
| Features |
|
|
Verdict
Vanna AI and Wren AI are the two genuinely open-source options in AI analytics assistants, and both can run entirely self-hosted with a local LLM so no query text has to leave your infrastructure. They get to a correct query in different ways. Vanna is retrieval-augmented: you "train" it by feeding schema definitions, documentation, and example question/SQL pairs, and at query time it retrieves the most relevant context and asks an LLM to write SQL from it — accuracy is a direct function of how much and how well-curated that training set is. Wren AI instead asks you to write a Modeling Definition Language (MDL) file up front — tables, joins, and business metrics defined once — and compiles every question against that governed model rather than raw schema plus retrieved examples.
In practice: Vanna is faster to get a first answer out of, because a handful of example queries is enough to start. Wren AI takes more upfront investment to define the MDL, but the result is a portable, inspectable semantic layer that stays consistent as more people ask questions, closer in spirit to what a dedicated semantic layer product offers.
Choose Vanna AI if
- You want to start fast with a lightweight, example-driven training set rather than a full model definition.
- Your use case is closer to a single engineering team's internal tool than an organization-wide, governed data-access layer.
- You want the flexibility to swap in any hosted or local LLM via Ollama without being tied to a specific model.
Choose Wren AI if
- You want a governed semantic layer — Wren's MDL — that AI agents (and other tools) query consistently, not just an LLM prompted with retrieved examples.
- You're comfortable investing the setup time to define tables, joins, and metrics once, in exchange for more consistent answers later.
- You want an embeddable API and dbt integration in the same open-source-rooted platform, with a hosted Cloud tier available if you later want a UI.
The honest caveat
Neither tool is free once you count engineering time: self-hosting either one means someone owns deployment, and Wren AI's MDL in particular is real modeling work, not a configuration checkbox. Both also sell a hosted commercial tier (Vanna Cloud; Wren AI Cloud and Enterprise Plus) that trades that maintenance cost for a subscription — worth comparing against your own build-vs-buy math before committing to the self-hosted route. See text-to-SQL and retrieval-augmented generation for the underlying techniques.
Last reviewed September 22, 2026