Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-16 13:34 UTC

Comfy-Org / ComfyUI

The most powerful and modular diffusion model GUI, api and backend with a graph/nodes interface.

PythonGPL-3.0★ 133,494 stars⑂ 15,797 forkssince Jan 2023View on GitHub ↗

Comfy-Org/ComfyUI holds a health index of 87 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (96/100) and lowest on Security (50/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

87
overall / 100
Excellent

Software health index

Metrics are grouped into weighted categories on one standardized 1–100 scale. Overall starts as their weighted mean, calibrated against the distribution of the public record so bands carry percentile meaning; when public evidence triggers the High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy, the rating is adjusted and receives an At Risk ceiling of 34.

87
Exceptional93-100The record's top tier (≈ top 5%); essentially all checked criteria met
Excellent80-92Strong across the board; minor gaps
Good65-79Healthy; gaps are limited and manageable
Moderate50-64Acceptable with notable gaps; review recommended
Weak35-49Material weaknesses across several areas
At Risk20-34Significant weaknesses; adoption warrants caution
Critical1-19Severe problems (abandoned, single-maintainer, no hygiene)
VitalityCommunity &AdoptionSustainability &GovernanceEngineeringQualitySecurityAI Readiness

Score profile

Each axis is a category. The shape matters more than the average — a healthy subject fills the whole shape, while a spike-and-crater profile means strength in one dimension is masking risk in another.

The weighted overall 73 is calibrated to 87 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Comfy OrgOrganization
3,491 followers82 public repossince Apr 2024

This repository is backed by an organization — shared, accountable stewardship that can outlive any single maintainer.

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
PyPIComfyUI0.0.1-1824 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping?

96Exceptional · 21% of overall

Development activity

100Exceptional
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
36/36Commit cadence — 52/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 2,031 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year2,031
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year52
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 100 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~6.9 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tagv0.36.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases6.9

Community & Adoption

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors?

86Excellent · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

100Exceptional
How it's scored
60/60Stars — 133,494 stars
25/25Forks — 15,797 forks
15/15Watchers — 811 watchers
Inputs used
forks15,797
stars133,494
watchers811
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (GPL-3.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep?

53Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
9.2/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 59% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 100 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 16 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled100
top_contributor_share0.59
How it's scored
23/42Issue resolution — 55% of issues closed
21.1/30PR acceptance — 3,327/4,726 decided PRs merged
3.2/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 1/4 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
13.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 29/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
merged_prs3,327
open_issues4,233
closed_issues5,105
prs_merged_7d30
prs_decided_7d59
prs_merged_30d30
prs_decided_30d59
issue_closed_ratio0.547
closed_unmerged_prs1,399
first_time_authors_30d2
first_time_prs_merged_30d1
first_time_prs_decided_30d4
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
25/25Owner reach — 3,491 followers of Comfy-Org
17.9/25Track record — 82 public repos, account ~2 yr old
Inputs used
followers3,491
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginComfy-Org
public_repos82
account_age_days889
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
4/35Publish recency — latest publish 824 days ago
4/20Version history — 1 published versions
0/20Not deprecated — ComfyUI: deprecated/yanked on the registry
Inputs used
packagesComfyUI
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedyes
min_days_since_publish824

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

80Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 28 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff], [tool.pylint])
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 29 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://www.comfy.org/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 6 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsstable-diffusion, pytorch, ai, python, comfy, comfyui
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://www.comfy.org/
docs_sitehttps://www.comfy.org/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

Are visible security and supply-chain practices strong, without unresolved high-risk jurisdiction exposure?

50Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
3.8/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 29 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
6.8/7.5Code-Review — Found 29/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 16 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 56 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate3.8
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages6
unassessed_packages34
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 6 resolved dependencies against OSV. 34 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list. This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so the repository dependency graph was assessed instead. That graph mixes development and test pins with shipped dependencies, so only the declared runtime dependencies are scored; transitive findings are reported as context and excluded from the score. Reachability is not analyzed.

AI Readiness

How well is the repo equipped to be developed and maintained with AI coding agents? Carries a deliberately small weight (4%): agent tooling is a real maintenance signal, but a repository with none can still reach 100/100.

66Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — AGENTS.md
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://www.comfy.org/llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 81 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://www.comfy.org/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.81
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes24,564
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff], [tool.pylint])
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Python without a type-check config
52.6/55Manageable file sizes — 39/912 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes213,669
source_files_sampled912
oversized_source_files39
How it's scored
40/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — openapi.yaml
0/20MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examples — examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_filesopenapi.yaml
interfaces_expected_of—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

133,494GitHub stars
100contributors
2,031commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
100releases
1bus factor
4,233open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • pypi download statistics for 'ComfyUI' unavailable this scan (stats endpoint failed after retries); adoption may be under-evidenced

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 15,797 ⇿
0Stars
15,797Forks
5Releases

When each star and fork was added, collected from GitHub and bucketed by day. Cumulative growth sits directly above the daily additions it is made of, so the two read against each other: steady organic accretion looks nothing like an abrupt, short-lived burst. Where that difference is measurable, it is reported as growth authenticity.

Only the most recent history is shown — this repository exceeds the collection window, so the earliest history is not captured.

14,80015,00015,20015,40015,60015,80015,797552026-082026-082026-09
Major 0Minor 4Patch 1
OpenSSF Scorecard 3.8 / 10
3.8aggregate

Independent, tool-agnostic security assessment from the open-source OpenSSF Scorecard. Each check rewards a security practice, not a specific vendor's tool. Checks Scorecard could not determine are marked n/a and excluded from the security score (never counted as zero).Scorecard v5.5.0 · 2026-09-16 13:33 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests29 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
9Code-ReviewFound 29/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
10Contributorsproject has 16 contributing companies or organizations
0Dangerous-Workflowdangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities56 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 40

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 40 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIaiohttp—indirect
PyPIalembic—indirect
PyPIav—indirect
PyPIblake3—indirect
PyPIcomfy-aimdo0.5.5indirect
PyPIcomfy-angle—indirect
PyPIcomfy-kitchen0.2.34indirect
PyPIcomfyui-embedded-docs0.5.11indirect
PyPIcomfyui-frontend-package1.52.7indirect
PyPIcomfyui-manager4.2.2indirect
PyPIcomfyui-workflow-templates0.11.62indirect
PyPIeinops—indirect
PyPIfilelock—indirect
PyPIkornia—indirect
PyPInumpy—indirect
PyPIpillow—indirect
PyPIpsutil—indirect
PyPIpydantic—indirect
PyPIpydantic-settings—indirect
PyPIpyopengl—indirect
PyPIpytest—indirect
PyPIpytest-aiohttp—indirect
PyPIpytest-asyncio—indirect
PyPIpyyaml—indirect
PyPIrequests—indirect
PyPIsafetensors—indirect
PyPIscipy—indirect
PyPIsentencepiece—indirect
PyPIsimpleeval—indirect
PyPIspandrel—indirect
PyPIsqlalchemy—indirect
PyPItokenizers—indirect
PyPItorch—indirect
PyPItorchaudio—indirect
PyPItorchsde—indirect
PyPItorchvision—indirect
PyPItqdm—indirect
PyPItransformers—indirect
PyPIwebsocket-client—indirect
PyPIyarl—indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 6 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 34 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

No known advisories affect the assessed dependencies.

An advisory means the version recorded in the dependency graph falls inside an advisory’s affected range. Reachability is not analysed, and the graph includes development and test pins — a finding may concern tooling rather than shipped software.

Raw JSON report machine-readable

Feedback

Spotted something off in this report, or have thoughts to share? Wrong measurements, missed tooling, ideas, questions — anything is welcome. Every message is read and gets a response.

The message is kept through sign-in.

Scores are signals, not warranties. They reflect publicly visible practices on GitHub — not a code audit, and not a security guarantee.

Missing data is excluded and weights renormalized, never scored as zero. Methodology is versioned and open: metrics v2.10.0, schema v0.34.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statistics — PyPI.