Suvadu vs Hstr: A Modern Hstr Alternative for Shell History (2026)
Looking for an Hstr alternative? Suvadu vs Hstr compared on storage, search, privacy, and AI agent support — and why a SQLite-backed history beats a text file.
Hstr (HSTR) has been a reliable companion for years — a curses-based UI that makes your Bash/Zsh history searchable, with favorites and the ability to clean out commands you don't want. It's lightweight and it works. But it's also built around the same plain-text history file your shell has always used, and that design ceiling is exactly why people start looking for an Hstr alternative. Here's how Suvadu compares.
Suvadu vs Hstr at a glance
| Feature | Suvadu | Hstr |
|---|---|---|
| Language | Rust | C |
| Storage | SQLite (WAL mode) | Plain text history file |
| Metadata per command | Dir, exit code, timestamp, executor, session | Command text (+ timestamps if enabled) |
| Search | Full-screen TUI + filter panel | Curses UI, ranking/substring/regex |
| Favorites / bookmarks | Bookmarks & notes | Favorites |
| Privacy | 100% local | 100% local |
| AI agent tracking | Claude Code, Cursor, OpenCode, Antigravity | — |
| MCP server | Built-in (15 tools) | — |
| Risk assessment | Yes | — |
| Stats / heatmap | Yes | — |
| Cross-machine export | Encrypted export / import | — |
Where Hstr is great
- It's tiny and ubiquitous. Hstr is in most package managers, has almost no footprint, and runs anywhere — including older boxes where you wouldn't install anything heavier.
- History cleanup. Hstr makes it genuinely easy to remove commands you never want to see again, straight from the UI.
- Favorites. Pinning frequently-used commands is simple and effective.
If you want the lightest possible improvement over raw history search on a stock machine, Hstr is a fine choice. Suvadu's case is about what a database-backed history unlocks that a text file simply can't.
1. A database instead of a text file
Hstr reads the same flat history file your shell writes. That caps what's possible: there's limited structured metadata, concurrent shells can clobber each other's history, and rich queries aren't really on the table. Suvadu records each command into SQLite in WAL mode with the directory, exit code, timestamp, session, and executor attached. That's what makes filtering ("failed commands in this repo last week") and stats possible at all.
2. Search that filters, not just matches
Hstr's UI ranks and matches your history well. Suvadu's search TUI goes further with a filter panel — narrow by directory, time range, exit code, session, or executor before you even start typing. When your history has tens of thousands of entries across many projects, filtering beats scrolling.
3. It understands AI coding agents
This is the capability gap that matters most in 2026. Hstr has no notion of who ran a command. Suvadu records the executor — human, Claude Code, Cursor, OpenCode, Antigravity, CI — and the prompt behind each agent command, so you can review and replay exactly what an agent did and flag anything risky with risk assessment. See agent tracking.
4. Your history as agent memory
Suvadu's built-in MCP server lets AI agents query your command history directly — what ran, what failed, what changed. Hstr has nothing comparable. If you want your history to help your agent, not just yourself, this is a category Suvadu occupies alone.
So, Hstr or Suvadu?
- Stay on Hstr if you want a minimal, dependency-light history search with easy cleanup and favorites on a stock machine.
- Move to Suvadu if you want structured, queryable history, real filtering and stats, AI-agent tracking, or history exposed to your agent via MCP.
Suvadu installs in one line and imports your existing history, so you can try it without losing anything.
Install Suvadu → · Compare all four: Atuin vs McFly vs Hstr vs Suvadu →
Builder of Suvadu. Writes Rust, thinks about shell history more than most people, and believes developer tools should be local-first.