LangExtract vs Pathway
A side-by-side look at pricing, capabilities, pros, cons, and our editorial scores.
LangExtract RAG | Pathway RAG | |
|---|---|---|
| Tagline | Google's open-source Python library for LLM-driven structured extraction from unstructured text, with source-grounded outputs. | Live data framework for production RAG and streaming ETL pipelines in Python. |
| Category | RAG | RAG |
| Pricing | Free· Library is free (Apache-2.0); LLM API costs depend on chosen backend | Freemium· Community free (BSL 1.1, 8GB/4 cores); Scale and Enterprise tiers with license key |
| Model | Multi-model (Gemini, GPT-4/4o, Ollama-hosted local models) | Multi-model |
| Editorial score | 7.1 / 10 | 7.3 / 10 |
| Use cases | structured-extractiondocument-parsingentity-extractionlong-document-qaclinical-textlegal-document-parsing | live-ragstreaming-etldocument-indexingmultimodal-raganomaly-detection |
| Pros |
|
|
| Cons |
|
|
| Website | pypi.org | pathway.com |
Pick LangExtract if
- ✅ Source grounding maps every extracted field back to its character span in the original text
- ✅ Handles long documents via chunking and multi-pass extraction
- ✅ Works with Gemini, OpenAI, and local Ollama models behind one API
- ✅ Built-in interactive HTML visualizer for reviewing extractions
Pick Pathway if
- ✅ Genuinely live indexing - documents update without rebuild jobs
- ✅ Self-hosted under BSL 1.1, no data leaves your infra
- ✅ Rich connector library (Kafka, S3, SharePoint, Postgres, Delta Lake)
- ✅ Same pipeline handles batch and streaming