Mitos vs Daytona

Mitos forks running memory into a fleet by default, each agent in its own microVM. Daytona runs containers by default, its memory fork is experimental and access-gated, and its runtime moved to a private codebase in June 2026.

In short

Mitos forks running memory by default: generally available, microVM-isolated, and Apache-2.0. Daytona added a memory fork, but it is experimental and access-gated, its default isolation is containers, and its runtime is now closed source. For a fork you can rely on today, openly, Mitos is built for it.

Mitos vs Daytona, capability by capability

Capabilities from each project's public docs as of June 2026, not a head-to-head benchmark. Numbers move; the source of truth is each project's own repo and docs.

Capability Mitos Daytona
Fork a running VM, generally available + ungated default experimental, gated
microVM isolation by default (own kernel) Firecracker microVM, KVM container default
Published marginal cost per fork ~3 MiB / fork
Open source engine (Apache 2.0) Apache 2.0 closed source
Sandbox create speed ~27 ms fork (ours) sub-90 ms (their figure)
Fully managed cloud yes

What sets Mitos apart

microVM by default

Every Mitos fork is a Firecracker microVM with its own kernel. Daytona’s default sandbox is a container, with microVM only as an option. For running untrusted, model-written code, the default boundary is what most of your workloads run on.

A fork you can use today

Mitos forks running memory by default, generally available and ungated. Daytona added a memory fork, but it is experimental and gated behind a request, and its other snapshots are prebuilt images, not a copy of your live running state.

Open, not closed

The Mitos engine is Apache 2.0 across the board, the same code the managed service runs, so you can build on it and self-host. Daytona moved its core runtime to a private codebase in June 2026 and its public repo is unmaintained, so the open path teams adopted is gone.

Why teams pick Mitos over Daytona

  • A memory fork that is generally available and ungated, not experimental behind a request.
  • microVM isolation by default (own kernel), where Daytona defaults to containers.
  • An Apache-2.0 engine you can self-host, where Daytona moved its runtime behind a private codebase.

Mitos vs Daytona, in brief

Does Daytona fork running memory?

Daytona added a memory fork, but it is experimental and access-gated, and its default sandboxes are containers. Mitos forks running memory by default, generally available and microVM-isolated.

Is Daytona microVM-isolated?

By default Daytona uses containers, with microVM as an option. Mitos runs every fork as a Firecracker microVM with its own kernel by default.

Is Daytona open source?

No. As of June 2026 Daytona moved its core runtime to a private codebase and its public repo is unmaintained (its client SDKs were permissive). The Mitos engine is Apache 2.0 throughout, and the managed service runs the same code you can self-host.

Other comparisons

Fork one machine into a swarm.