Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-27 22:26 UTC

Kotlin / kotlinx.coroutines

Library support for Kotlin coroutines

KotlinApache-2.0★ 13,806 stars⑂ 1,947 forkssince Jun 2016View on GitHub ↗

Kotlin/kotlinx.coroutines holds a health index of 80 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (84/100) and lowest on Engineering Quality (48/100). It was last updated today. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

80
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.

80
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 68 is calibrated to 80 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

KotlinOrganization · verified domain
3,408 followers140 public repossince Feb 2012

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
npmkotlinx-coroutines-test1.7.3101251129 days agokotlinasynccoroutinesjetbrainstest

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

84Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
22.8/36Commit cadence33/52 weeks with commits
17.2/18Commit volume82 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained11 commit(s) and 11 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year82
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year33
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases100 releases published
27/36Release recencylatest release 111 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~80.9 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tag1.11.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release111
mean_days_between_releases80.9
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?

78Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
60/60Stars13,806 stars
25/25Forks1,947 forks
13.7/15Watchers289 watchers
Inputs used
forks1,947
stars13,806
watchers289
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

85Excellent
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
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges5
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
26.8/80Monthly downloads101 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packageskotlinx-coroutines-test
dependents
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads
monthly_downloads101
unverified_packages_excluded
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Registry dependents. Remaining weights renormalized.

Sustainability & Governance

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

77Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
14.3/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 37% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth100 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 18 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled100
top_contributor_share0.366
How it's scored
37.1/42Issue resolution88% of issues closed
23.4/30PR acceptance1,654/2,121 decided PRs merged
6.5/13Newcomer PR acceptance3/6 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
12/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 24/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
merged_prs1,654
open_issues296
closed_issues2,248
prs_merged_7d2
prs_decided_7d4
prs_merged_30d10
prs_decided_30d16
issue_closed_ratio0.884
closed_unmerged_prs467
first_time_authors_30d4
first_time_prs_merged_30d3
first_time_prs_decided_30d6
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
20/20Verified domain
25/25Owner reach3,408 followers of Kotlin
25/25Track record140 public repos, account ~14 yr old
Inputs used
followers3,408
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginKotlin
public_repos140
account_age_days5,305
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on npm
4/35Publish recencylatest publish 1,129 days ago
20/20Version history25 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packageskotlinx-coroutines-test
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish1,129

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

48Weak · 19% of overall
How it's scored
0/24CI workflows
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests0 out of 26 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_cino
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics3 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicskotlin, coroutines, async
has_wikino
homepage
docs_site
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
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
5.2/7.5Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
0/2.5CI-Tests0 out of 26 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
6/7.5Code-ReviewFound 24/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 18 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflowno data
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained11 commit(s) and 11 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesno data
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsno data
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated12
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive6
scorecard_aggregate5
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. Remaining weights renormalized.

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.

67Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)llms.txt served by the project website (https://kotlinlang.org/llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history89 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://kotlinlang.org/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.89
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrapbenchmarks/build.gradle.kts, build.gradle.kts, buildSrc/build.gradle.kts (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingKotlin (statically typed)
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesno data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsbenchmarks/build.gradle.kts, build.gradle.kts, buildSrc/build.gradle.kts, integration-testing/build.gradle.kts, integration-testing/java8Test/build.gradle.kts, integration-testing/jpmsTest/build.gradle.kts, integration-testing/r8Test/build.gradle.kts, integration-testing/safeDebugAgentTest/build.gradle.kts, integration-testing/smokeTest/build.gradle.kts, integration/kotlinx-coroutines-guava/build.gradle.kts, integration/kotlinx-coroutines-jdk8/build.gradle.kts, integration/kotlinx-coroutines-play-services/build.gradle.kts, integration/kotlinx-coroutines-slf4j/build.gradle.kts, kotlinx-coroutines-bom/build.gradle.kts, kotlinx-coroutines-core/build.gradle.kts, kotlinx-coroutines-debug/build.gradle.kts, kotlinx-coroutines-test/build.gradle.kts, reactive/kotlinx-coroutines-jdk9/build.gradle.kts, reactive/kotlinx-coroutines-reactive/build.gradle.kts, reactive/kotlinx-coroutines-reactor/build.gradle.kts, reactive/kotlinx-coroutines-rx2/build.gradle.kts, reactive/kotlinx-coroutines-rx3/build.gradle.kts, test-utils/build.gradle.kts, ui/kotlinx-coroutines-android/android-unit-tests/build.gradle.kts, ui/kotlinx-coroutines-android/build.gradle.kts, ui/kotlinx-coroutines-javafx/build.gradle.kts, ui/kotlinx-coroutines-swing/build.gradle.kts
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeKotlin (statically typed)
54.8/55Manageable file sizes3/1,062 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageKotlin
largest_source_bytes151,718
source_files_sampled1,062
oversized_source_files3
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP servernot applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examplesexamples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files
interfaces_expected_of
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto), MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

13,806GitHub stars
100contributors
82commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
100releases
2bus factor
296open issues
Mavenpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 1,947 ⇿
0Stars
1,947Forks
40Releases

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.

5001,0001,5002,0001,947102020-052023-072026-08
Major 0Minor 8Patch 18

Each point covers 6 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.0 / 10
5.0aggregate

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 · 2026-08-27 22:25 UTC

7Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
n/aBranch-Protectioninternal error: error during branchesHandler.setup: internal error: some github tokens can't read classic branch protection rules: https://github.com/ossf/scorecard-action/blob/main/docs/authentication/fine-grained-auth-token.md
0CI-Tests0 out of 26 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
8Code-ReviewFound 24/27 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
10Contributorsproject has 18 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained11 commit(s) and 11 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 0

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

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Dependency advisories not assessed

Advisory matching could not run for this report: No resolved dependencies to assess

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 statisticsnpm.