Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-13 12:10 UTC

Consensys-Incorporated / teku

🚀 Open-source Ethereum consensus client written in Java

JavaApache-2.0★ 778 stars⑂ 389 forkssince Sep 2018View on GitHub ↗

Consensys-Incorporated/teku holds a health index of 98 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Vitality (99/100) and lowest on Security (71/100). It was last updated 1 day ago. 4 contributors account for most of its recent work.

98
overall / 100
Exceptional

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.

98
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 86 is calibrated to 98 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Consensys IncorporatedOrganization · verified domain
9 followers194 public repossince Aug 2026

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

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

99Exceptional · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 1 days ago
35.3/36Commit cadence51/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume830 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year830
human_commit_share0.97
days_since_last_push1
active_weeks_last_year51

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases100 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 33 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~28.9 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tag26.8.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release33
mean_days_between_releases28.9
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Community & Adoption

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

88Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
46.9/60Stars778 stars
21.6/25Forks389 forks
8.3/15Watchers32 watchers
Inputs used
forks389
stars778
watchers32
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

100Exceptional
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (Apache-2.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
7.2/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges6
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateyes
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes

Sustainability & Governance

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

83Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
43.2/54Bus factor4 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
17.6/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 22% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth98 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 16 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor4
contributors_sampled98
top_contributor_share0.22
How it's scored
39.4/42Issue resolution94% of issues closed
27.2/30PR acceptance7,162/7,908 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance1/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
15/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
Inputs used
merged_prs7,162
open_issues207
closed_issues3,087
prs_merged_7d15
prs_decided_7d17
prs_merged_30d55
prs_decided_30d58
issue_closed_ratio0.937
closed_unmerged_prs746
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d1
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
20/20Verified domain
7.2/25Owner reach9 followers of Consensys-Incorporated
13.1/25Track record194 public repos, account ~0 yr old
Inputs used
followers9
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginConsensys-Incorporated
public_repos194
account_age_days23

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

86Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows11 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config.eslintrc.yml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests30 out of 30 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

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://consensys.io/teku
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics8 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsjava, consensys, ethereum, beacon-chain, eth2, proof-of-stake, teku, eth2-clients
has_wikino
homepagehttps://consensys.io/teku
docs_sitehttps://consensys.io/teku
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

71Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
6.8/7.5Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
6/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
7.5/7.5Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 16 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packagingno data
3.5/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 7
4.5/5SASTSAST tool detected but not run on all commits
4.5/5Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0.8/7.5Vulnerabilities9 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate7.1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
14/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories1 affected: js-yaml 4.1.1 (high 7.5)
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
40/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory has been public longer than 90 days
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories9
affected_packages3
assessed_packages82
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityhigh 2, moderate 1
direct_affected_packages1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 82 resolved dependencies against OSV. 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.

88Excellent · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructionsAGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)llms.txt served by the project website (https://consensys.io/llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history88 of 97 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://consensys.io/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.907
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes20,320
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrapacceptance-tests/build.gradle, beacon/pow/build.gradle, beacon/sync/build.gradle (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config.eslintrc.yml
11/11Static type checkingJava (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environmentDockerfile, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
7/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespackage-lock.json
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsacceptance-tests/build.gradle, beacon/pow/build.gradle, beacon/sync/build.gradle, beacon/validator/build.gradle, build.gradle, buildSrc/build.gradle, builder/build.gradle, builder/rest/build.gradle, data/beaconrestapi/build.gradle, data/dataexchange/build.gradle, data/provider/build.gradle, data/publisher/build.gradle, data/serializer/build.gradle, eth-benchmark-tests/build.gradle, eth-reference-tests/build.gradle, eth-tests/build.gradle, ethereum/dataproviders/build.gradle, ethereum/events/build.gradle, ethereum/execution-types/build.gradle, ethereum/executionclient/build.gradle, ethereum/executionlayer/build.gradle, ethereum/json-types/build.gradle, ethereum/networks/build.gradle, ethereum/performance-trackers/build.gradle, ethereum/pow/api/build.gradle, ethereum/pow/merkletree/build.gradle, ethereum/signingrecord/build.gradle, ethereum/spec/build.gradle, ethereum/statetransition/build.gradle, ethereum/weaksubjectivity/build.gradle, fork-choice-tests/build.gradle, fuzz/build.gradle, infrastructure/async/build.gradle, infrastructure/bls-keystore/build.gradle, infrastructure/bls/build.gradle, infrastructure/build.gradle, infrastructure/bytes/build.gradle, infrastructure/collections/build.gradle, infrastructure/crypto/build.gradle, infrastructure/events/build.gradle, infrastructure/exceptions/build.gradle, infrastructure/http/build.gradle, infrastructure/io/build.gradle, infrastructure/json/build.gradle, infrastructure/kzg/build.gradle, infrastructure/logging/build.gradle, infrastructure/metrics/build.gradle, infrastructure/restapi/build.gradle, infrastructure/serviceutils/build.gradle, infrastructure/ssz/build.gradle, infrastructure/ssz/generator/build.gradle, infrastructure/subscribers/build.gradle, infrastructure/time/build.gradle, infrastructure/unsigned/build.gradle, infrastructure/version/build.gradle, infrastructure/yaml/build.gradle, networking/build.gradle, networking/eth2/build.gradle, networking/nat/build.gradle, networking/p2p/build.gradle, services/beaconchain/build.gradle, services/bootnode/build.gradle, services/build.gradle, services/chainstorage/build.gradle, services/executionlayer/build.gradle, services/powchain/build.gradle, services/timer/build.gradle, services/zkchain/build.gradle, storage/api/build.gradle, storage/build.gradle, teku/build.gradle, validator/api/build.gradle, validator/beaconnode/build.gradle, validator/build.gradle, validator/client/build.gradle, validator/eventadapter/build.gradle, validator/remote/build.gradle
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeJava (statically typed)
54.8/55Manageable file sizes14/4,877 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJava
largest_source_bytes160,135
source_files_sampled4,877
oversized_source_files14

Key facts

778GitHub stars
98contributors
830commits, last 12 months
1days since last push
100releases
4bus factor
207open issues
Maven, npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Could not fetch npm package 'openapidoc' from its registry

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 389 ⇿
0Stars
389Forks
100Releases

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.

0100200300400384132018-122022-102026-08
Major 0Minor 56Patch 43

Each point covers 8 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 7.1 / 10
7.1aggregate

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 · 2026-09-13 12:09 UTC

9Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
8Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
10Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
10Contributorsproject has 16 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
7Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 7
9SASTSAST tool detected but not run on all commits
9Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
1Vulnerabilities9 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 3
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npmgit-url-parse^13.1.0.openapidoc/package.json
npmjs-yaml^4.1.1.openapidoc/package.json
npmnode-fetch^3.3.1.openapidoc/package.json
All dependencies 82

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 3 direct and 79 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npmgit-url-parse13.1.0direct
npmjs-yaml4.1.1direct
npmnode-fetch3.3.1direct
npm@aashutoshrathi/word-wrap1.2.6indirect
npm@eslint-community/eslint-utils4.9.1indirect
npm@eslint-community/regexpp4.12.2indirect
npm@eslint/config-array0.23.3indirect
npm@eslint/config-helpers0.5.3indirect
npm@eslint/core1.1.1indirect
npm@eslint/object-schema3.0.3indirect
npm@eslint/plugin-kit0.6.1indirect
npm@humanfs/core0.19.1indirect
npm@humanfs/node0.16.7indirect
npm@humanwhocodes/module-importer1.0.1indirect
npm@humanwhocodes/retry0.4.3indirect
npm@types/esrecurse4.3.1indirect
npm@types/estree1.0.8indirect
npm@types/json-schema7.0.15indirect
npmacorn8.16.0indirect
npmacorn-jsx5.3.2indirect
npmajv6.14.0indirect
npmargparse2.0.1indirect
npmbalanced-match4.0.4indirect
npmbrace-expansion5.0.5indirect
npmcross-spawn7.0.6indirect
npmdata-uri-to-buffer4.0.1indirect
npmdebug4.4.3indirect
npmdeep-is0.1.4indirect
npmescape-string-regexp4.0.0indirect
npmeslint10.1.0indirect
npmeslint-scope9.1.2indirect
npmeslint-visitor-keys3.4.3indirect
npmeslint-visitor-keys5.0.1indirect
npmespree11.2.0indirect
npmesquery1.7.0indirect
npmesrecurse4.3.0indirect
npmestraverse5.3.0indirect
npmesutils2.0.3indirect
npmfast-deep-equal3.1.3indirect
npmfast-json-stable-stringify2.1.0indirect
npmfast-levenshtein2.0.6indirect
npmfetch-blob3.2.0indirect
npmfile-entry-cache8.0.0indirect
npmfind-up5.0.0indirect
npmflat-cache4.0.1indirect
npmflatted3.4.2indirect
npmformdata-polyfill4.0.10indirect
npmgit-up7.0.0indirect
npmglob-parent6.0.2indirect
npmignore5.3.2indirect
npmimurmurhash0.1.4indirect
npmis-extglob2.1.1indirect
npmis-glob4.0.3indirect
npmis-ssh1.4.0indirect
npmisexe2.0.0indirect
npmjson-buffer3.0.1indirect
npmjson-schema-traverse0.4.1indirect
npmjson-stable-stringify-without-jsonify1.0.1indirect
npmkeyv4.5.4indirect
npmlevn0.4.1indirect
npmlocate-path6.0.0indirect
npmminimatch10.2.4indirect
npmms2.1.3indirect
npmnatural-compare1.4.0indirect
npmnode-domexception1.0.0indirect
npmoptionator0.9.3indirect
npmp-limit3.1.0indirect
npmp-locate5.0.0indirect
npmparse-path7.0.0indirect
npmparse-url8.1.0indirect
npmpath-exists4.0.0indirect
npmpath-key3.1.1indirect
npmprelude-ls1.2.1indirect
npmprotocols2.0.1indirect
npmpunycode2.3.1indirect
npmshebang-command2.0.0indirect
npmshebang-regex3.0.0indirect
npmtype-check0.4.0indirect
npmuri-js4.4.1indirect
npmweb-streams-polyfill3.2.1indirect
npmwhich2.0.2indirect
npmyocto-queue0.1.0indirect
Dependency advisories 3

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 82 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 3 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
js-yaml4.1.1directhigh44.3.2
brace-expansion5.0.5indirecthigh45.0.9
@humanfs/node0.16.7indirectmoderate10.16.8

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.