Both claim to cut your Claude bill. They solve different problems. Here's how to pick.
Run the free audit at aiusage.ai →| Dimension | AIUsage | Pruner |
|---|---|---|
| Pitch | Stop overpaying for Claude — 70-90% on same prompts | Cut your Claude Code bill by up to 70% |
| Savings claim | 70-90% (6 verified cases: 76-84%) | 70% |
| Workload coverage | Any Claude API workload — support, agents, code review, content, CRM codegen | Claude Code CLI only |
| Setup | One-line code change (swap API endpoint) | curl | bash Rust binary, replace `claude` with `pruner` |
| Free audit | Yes — paste bill, see number, no signup | Typically no |
| Mechanism disclosure | Private — "try it, the number is testable" | Local proxy with publicly documented context pruning + prompt-cache injection |
| Scope | Broad (workload-agnostic) | narrow — CLI coding sessions |
If your Claude usage is claude code cli only and you're comfortable with curl | bash rust binary, replace `claude` with `pruner`, Pruner is purpose-built for that shape. 6 GitHub stars if that matters to you.
If your Claude spend spans multiple workload types (support automation, agent loops, code review, content drafting, daily coding) or you want to audit your bill before you commit to any cost-reduction tool, AIUsage gives you the number first. No CLI install, no platform dependency, no code rewrite.
Pruner explains its mechanism publicly and requires a CLI install. AIUsage is mechanism-opaque and works on any Claude-compatible endpoint with a one-line code change.
Across six audited workloads, AIUsage's measured delta was 76-84% on the same prompts, blind A/B tested: