Every open-source tool in our directory carries a Health score from 0 to 100, calculated from each project's own live GitHub data. It's built from three public signals — nothing hidden and nothing paid. Here's the exact math.
Each project starts from an editorial baseline, then earns points for how current and widely-adopted it is. The result is clamped to a 0–100 scale.
How recently the maintainers pushed code. Fresh commits are the single strongest sign a project is alive.
GitHub stars — a proxy for how many developers trust, watch and rely on the project.
Forks — a signal that people are actually building on, extending or self-hosting the code, not just bookmarking it.
Take a fast-moving project that shipped code today, has 30k stars and 8k forks:
It measures project momentum and community adoption from public GitHub data, refreshed daily. It is not a security audit, a code-quality grade, or a paid ranking — no vendor can buy a higher score. Treat it as one honest signal among many, and always test a tool against your own needs.
Our score is intentionally simple, but the signals it uses — activity, popularity and adoption — are the same ones recognised open-source health frameworks rely on. If you need a deeper or security-focused assessment, these are the standards to reach for:
The Community Health Analytics in Open Source Software project defines standardised metrics for activity, responsiveness and community growth.
Automated checks for a repository's security posture — maintenance, code review, CI and dependency practices.
A quality-and-popularity ranking for open-source packages, weighing stars, forks, releases and contributor activity.
We don't claim parity with these frameworks — ours is a fast, at-a-glance signal for buyers comparing tools, not a formal audit. For security or governance decisions, use the standards above directly.
It reflects momentum and adoption, not fitness for your use case. A niche, stable tool can score lower than a trendy one yet still be the right choice. Use it as one input, alongside the tool's features, license and your own testing.
Every project page pulls fresh GitHub data on a daily revalidation cycle, so the score tracks real commit activity, stars and forks over time rather than a one-time snapshot.
No. The Health score measures project momentum and community adoption using public GitHub signals. It is not a security review, a code-quality grade, or an endorsement. Always evaluate a project against your own requirements.
Yes — every open-source project in the directory is scored by this formula, using its own live GitHub data. No tool is scored by hand and no score is set by the vendor, so the numbers stay comparable across the whole directory.
The 50-point base reflects the fact that a project only appears in our directory after editorial vetting. The remaining 50 points are earned from measurable, current signals — recency, stars and forks — so the score can move as the project does.
Yes — a project pushing code daily with a very large, widely-forked community reaches the top of the scale. It's deliberately hard to hit, so "Excellent" stays meaningful.