Kamu vs Soleur, two different growth agents
Soleur is a company-as-a-service platform of agents across eight business departments. Their site
Soleur is broader than Kamu by a wide margin and free if you self-host, which are two very good reasons to take it. Kamu is narrower and costs money, and the thing it buys is that the work happens without you approving each piece. Whether that is worth paying for depends entirely on how much you want to review.
Soleur describes itself as company-as-a-service: sixty-plus agents across engineering, marketing, legal, finance, operations, product, sales and support, aimed squarely at the solo founder wearing nine hats. The scope is far wider than Kamu's, which does six things and none of them are legal or finance.
It is also free to run yourself. The self-hosted version is source-available under BSL 1.1, and at time of writing the managed cloud is listed as coming soon with no published prices. For a founder with no budget and some tolerance for infrastructure, that is a genuinely strong offer and Kamu has no answer to it.
The difference that actually decides this is not scope or price, it is the approval model. Soleur is explicit that it is human-in-the-loop by design: every agent output is a starting point, and you review, edit and approve before anything ships. Kamu is built on the opposite premise. It sends the cold email, publishes the post and files the listing on its own schedule, inside hard limits, and brings you only the decisions that spend money or change the plan.
That is the whole comparison. One assumes you want many agents working with your judgment on each output; the other assumes the reviewing is the bottleneck you were trying to remove.
Side by side
| Kamu | Soleur | |
|---|---|---|
| Scope | Six jobs: outreach, SEO articles, social, a landing page, directory listings, Meta ads. | 60+ agents across eight departments, including engineering, legal and finance. |
| Who presses send | Kamu does, inside hard caps. Decisions that spend money or change the plan come to you. | You do. Every output is explicitly a starting point for you to review and approve. |
| What it costs | €25 to €349 a month, published, hosted. No free tier. | Free to self-host under BSL 1.1. Managed cloud is listed as coming soon, pricing unpublished. |
| What you run | Nothing. It is hosted, and there is no infrastructure on your side. | Your own deployment, if you take the free path. That is the trade for the price. |
| Sending and publishing | Sends cold email from your domain, posts to connected accounts, files listings itself. | Produces the work; shipping it is on the other side of your approval. |
| Where the knowledge lives | A written strategy and memory documents you can open, edit and correct. | A shared knowledge base the agents compound into, per their own description. |
When Soleur is the better choice
Take Soleur if you have no budget, or if the breadth is the point. Sixty agents across eight departments covers work Kamu does not touch at all. Nothing here writes your contracts, does your bookkeeping or reviews your code. A founder who wants help across the whole company rather than depth in growth is asking for what Soleur is. Self-hosting for nothing is also simply a better deal than paying, if you are comfortable running it. And take it if you want to approve everything: plenty of founders do, particularly early, and Kamu is genuinely the wrong shape for somebody who wants to read every email before it goes.
Questions
Is Soleur free?
The self-hosted version is source-available under BSL 1.1 and free to run, which means you provide the infrastructure. Their managed cloud was listed as coming soon with no published pricing when this page was checked, so a like-for-like hosted comparison is not possible yet.
What is the real difference?
Approval. Soleur says plainly that every agent output is a starting point and you review, edit and approve before anything ships. Kamu sends and publishes on its own inside hard plan limits, and only brings you decisions that spend money or change the plan. If reviewing each piece is the bottleneck you were trying to remove, that is the whole comparison; if it is the control you wanted, Soleur is right and Kamu is not.
Soleur does far more. Why would I take the narrower one?
Because breadth and depth are a trade, and outreach in particular is mostly unglamorous specifics: checking an address resolves before sending, telling a no from an unsubscribe, spacing follow-ups, keeping off a suppression list across every product you run. Kamu enforces those in code rather than asking a model to remember them. Whether that depth is worth giving up seven departments is a real question, and for a founder whose problem is customers rather than contracts the answer is often yes.
Can I run both?
Nothing stops you, and they overlap least where each is strongest. The honest caution is cost and attention rather than conflict: two systems producing work is two systems to keep an eye on, and the reason for either was that you had too little attention to begin with.
Terms on this page
Other comparisons
Claims about Soleur were checked on . Pricing and features move, and some vendors do not publish prices at all. Check their own site before deciding. Sources: Soleur, Kamu pricing.