Context.ai vs Mastra
Context.ai vs Mastra, compared side by side on 24 data points: what each one does, how big it is, what it has raised, the tech running each site, and what users report. We score both out of 100 on traction, team and visibility: Context.ai is on 59/100 and Mastra on 74/100.
Where each one leads
Context.ai
- LinkedIn following: 17,697 against 7,648
Mastra
- our overall score: 74/100 against 59/100
- agent readiness: 58/100 against 50/100
- domain rating: 76/100 against 57/100
- funding raised: $35.5M against $18.0M
At a glance
| Measure | Context.ai | Mastra |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | Enterprise platform for building and deploying specialized AI agents and RAG applications. | An open-source TypeScript/JavaScript framework for building AI agents, from the creators of Gatsby. |
| Category | AI Agent, Retrieval Augmented Generation, RAG, Enterprise Software | AI Agent, Agentic AI, Developer Tools, Open Source |
| Sells toBusiness model | B2B | B2B |
| Offering | Software | Platform |
| Founded | 2023 | 2024 |
| Headquarters | Mountain View, United States | San Francisco, United States |
| Status | Active | Active |
Size, funding and growth
| Measure | Context.ai | Mastra |
|---|---|---|
| Employees | 68 | 56 |
| Headcount growthLast 12 months | Not published | +83.5% |
| Total funding | $18.0M | $35.5M |
| Latest round | Seed | Series A |
| Valuation | $70.0M | Not published |
| LinkedIn followers | 17,697 | 7,648 |
StartupHub scores
Our own 0-100 ratings. They measure company strength and site quality, not which product suits you.
| Measure | Context.ai | Mastra |
|---|---|---|
| StartupHub scoreOur 0-100 rating | 59/100 | 74/100 |
| Traction | 55/100 | 70/100 |
| Team | 70/100 | 70/100 |
| Community | 8/100 | 25/100 |
| Search visibility | 59/100 | 69/100 |
| Quality | 58/100 | 78/100 |
| Agent readinessHow well an AI agent can read and act on the site | D (50/100) | D (58/100) |
| Domain ratingLink authority, 0-100 | 57/100 | 76/100 |
Technology
Detected on each public site, so it reflects the marketing stack as well as the product.
| Measure | Context.ai | Mastra |
|---|---|---|
| Hosting | Vercel | Vercel |
| CDN | Vercel | Vercel |
| CMS | Ghost | Not detected |
| Frameworks | Tailwind CSS, Bootstrap | Next.js, Tailwind CSS |
| Open source | No | Yes, 15,100 GitHub stars |
| Self-hostable | No | Yes |
Product and pricing
| Measure | Context.ai | Mastra |
|---|---|---|
| Key features | Not published | AI Agent Framework, Workflows, RAG, Evals, Memory & Tool Selection, Open Source & Modular |
What users say
| Measure | Context.ai | Mastra |
|---|---|---|
| Community ratingVisitor votes on StartupHub | Not published | 5.0/5 from 2 votes |
Context.ai vs Mastra: common questions
Which is better, Context.ai or Mastra?
On our 0-100 score Mastra rates higher (74/100 against 59/100). The score weights traction, team, visibility and profile completeness, so it reflects company strength rather than which product suits you. We compare the two on 24 data points above: read the rows that match what you are buying for.
How do Context.ai and Mastra compare on the numbers?
Context.ai leads on LinkedIn following (17,697 against 7,648). Mastra leads on our overall score (74/100 against 59/100), agent readiness (58/100 against 50/100), domain rating (76/100 against 57/100), funding raised ($35.5M against $18.0M).
Read the full Context.ai review and pricing or the Mastra review and pricing. You can also browse other Context.ai alternatives we track.