Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-05 05:44 UTC

aio-libs / aiohttp

Asynchronous HTTP client/server framework for asyncio and Python

PythonApache-2.0★ 16,508 stars⑂ 2,362 forkssince Oct 2013View on GitHub ↗

aio-libs/aiohttp holds a health index of 34 out of 100, placing it in the At Risk band. It scores highest on Vitality (99/100) and lowest on Security (47/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

34
overall / 100
At Risk

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.

34
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 84 is calibrated to 96 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02). High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy applies a 75% multiplier to weighted overall health and gives it an At Risk ceiling of 34.

Ownership

aio-libsOrganization
1,200 followers68 public repossince Mar 2014

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
PyPIaiohttp3.14.3-31213 days ago

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 0 days ago
34.6/36Commit cadence50/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume1,533 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 12 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year1,533
human_commit_share0.33
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year50

Release discipline

98Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases100 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 13 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~32.1 days
8/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 5 signed artifacts.
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tagv3.14.3
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release13
mean_days_between_releases32.1

Community & Adoption

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

99Exceptional · 17% of overall
How it's scored
60/60Stars16,508 stars
25/25Forks2,362 forks
12.9/15Watchers210 watchers
Inputs used
forks2,362
stars16,508
watchers210
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_badges8
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateyes
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesbadge.fury.io, codecov.io, github.com, readthedocs.org, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes

Sustainability & Governance

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

76Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
11.1/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 51% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth94 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 91 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled94
top_contributor_share0.508
How it's scored
39.9/42Issue resolution95% of issues closed
25.3/30PR acceptance8,151/9,681 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance0/2 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
12/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 6/7 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
merged_prs8,151
open_issues158
closed_issues3,070
prs_merged_7d4
prs_decided_7d7
prs_merged_30d4
prs_decided_30d7
issue_closed_ratio0.951
closed_unmerged_prs1,530
first_time_authors_30d2
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d2
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
22.1/25Owner reach1,200 followers of aio-libs
25/25Track record68 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers1,200
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginaio-libs
public_repos68
account_age_days4,516
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 13 days ago
20/20Version history312 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesaiohttp
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish13

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

96Exceptional · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

100Exceptional
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows7 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.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_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://docs.aiohttp.org
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics8 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsaiohttp, asyncio, python, http, http-server, http-client, async, hacktoberfest
has_wikino
homepagehttps://docs.aiohttp.org
docs_sitehttps://docs.aiohttp.org
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

47Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
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
6/7.5Code-ReviewFound 6/7 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 91 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
5/5Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 12 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
5/5SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
5/5Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
6/7.5Signed-Releases5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 5 signed artifacts.
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate8.2
high_risk_jurisdiction_cap34
high_risk_jurisdiction_multiplier75
security_posture_after_multiplier62
security_posture_before_jurisdiction82
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection. Remaining weights renormalized. High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy applies a 75% multiplier and gives Security posture an At risk ceiling of 34.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriesno indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages8
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched the pypi:aiohttp@3.14.3 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 8 packages. 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.

84Excellent · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructionsAGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history26 of 33 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.788
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes3,638
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapMakefile, docs/Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking.mypy.ini, aiohttp/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environmentDockerfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance57 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesMakefile, docs/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs.mypy.ini, aiohttp/py.typed
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0.57
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable codePython with type-check config (.mypy.ini, aiohttp/py.typed)
51/55Manageable file sizes12/166 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes206,199
source_files_sampled166
oversized_source_files12
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

16,508GitHub stars
94contributors
1,533commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
100releases
1bus factor
158open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 2,362 ⇿
0Stars
2,362Forks
99Releases

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.

1,2001,4001,6001,8002,0002,2002,4002,362302021-022023-112026-08
Major 0Minor 7Patch 63

Each point covers 5 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 8.2 / 10
8.2aggregate

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 · 2026-08-05 05:44 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
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
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
8Code-ReviewFound 6/7 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
10Contributorsproject has 91 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
10Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 12 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
10SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
8Signed-Releases5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 5 signed artifacts.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 8
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIaiohappyeyeballs>= 2.5.0pyproject.toml
PyPIaiosignal>= 1.4.0pyproject.toml
PyPIasync-timeout>= 4.0, < 6.0pyproject.toml
PyPIfrozenlist>= 1.1.1pyproject.toml
PyPImultidict>=4.5, < 7.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpropcache>= 0.2.0pyproject.toml
PyPItyping_extensions>= 4.4pyproject.toml
PyPIyarl>= 1.17.0, < 2.0pyproject.toml
All dependencies 118

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 16 direct and 102 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIaiohappyeyeballsdirect
PyPIaiohappyeyeballs2.7.1direct
PyPIaiosignaldirect
PyPIaiosignal1.4.0direct
PyPIasync-timeoutdirect
PyPIasync-timeout5.0.1direct
PyPIfrozenlistdirect
PyPIfrozenlist1.8.0direct
PyPImultidictdirect
PyPImultidict6.7.1direct
PyPIpropcachedirect
PyPIpropcache0.5.2direct
PyPItyping-extensionsdirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.16.0direct
PyPIyarldirect
PyPIyarl1.24.5direct
npmllhttp9.4.2indirect
PyPIaiodns4.0.4indirect
PyPIaiofastnet1.0.1indirect
PyPIaiohttp3.14.3indirect
PyPIaiohttp-theme0.1.7indirect
PyPIalabaster1.0.0indirect
PyPIannotated-types0.8.0indirect
PyPIast-serialize0.6.0indirect
PyPIattrs26.1.0indirect
PyPIbabel2.18.0indirect
PyPIbackports-asyncio-runner1.2.0indirect
PyPIbackports-zstd1.3.0indirect
PyPIblockbuster1.5.26indirect
PyPIbrotli1.2.0indirect
PyPIbuild1.5.1indirect
PyPIcertifi2026.7.22indirect
PyPIcffi2.1.0indirect
PyPIcfgv3.5.0indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.4.9indirect
PyPIclick8.4.2indirect
PyPIcoverage7.15.2indirect
PyPIcryptography50.0.0indirect
PyPIcython3.2.9indirect
PyPIdistlib0.4.3indirect
PyPIdocutils0.21.2indirect
PyPIexceptiongroup1.3.1indirect
PyPIexecnet2.1.2indirect
PyPIfilelock3.32.2indirect
PyPIforbiddenfruit0.1.4indirect
PyPIfreezegun1.5.5indirect
PyPIgunicorn26.0.0indirect
PyPIidentify2.6.19indirect
PyPIidna3.18indirect
PyPIimagesize2.0.0indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPIisal1.8.0indirect
PyPIjinja23.1.6indirect
PyPIlibrt0.13.0indirect
PyPImarkdown-it-py3.0.0indirect
PyPImarkdown-it-py4.2.0indirect
PyPImarkupsafe3.0.3indirect
PyPImdit-py-plugins0.6.1indirect
PyPImdurl0.1.2indirect
PyPImypy2.1.0indirect
PyPImypy-extensions1.1.0indirect
PyPImyst-parser4.0.1indirect
PyPInodeenv1.10.0indirect
PyPIpackaging26.2indirect
PyPIpathspec1.1.1indirect
PyPIpip26.2indirect
PyPIpip-tools7.6.0indirect
PyPIpkgconfig1.6.0indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.11.0indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIpre-commit4.6.1indirect
PyPIproxy-py2.4.10indirect
PyPIpycares5.0.1indirect
PyPIpycparser3.0indirect
PyPIpydantic2.13.4indirect
PyPIpydantic-core2.46.4indirect
PyPIpyenchant3.3.0indirect
PyPIpygments2.20.0indirect
PyPIpyproject-hooks1.2.0indirect
PyPIpytest9.1.1indirect
PyPIpytest-aiohttp1.1.1indirect
PyPIpytest-asyncio1.4.0indirect
PyPIpytest-codspeed5.0.3indirect
PyPIpytest-cov7.1.0indirect
PyPIpytest-mock3.15.1indirect
PyPIpytest-timeout2.4.0indirect
PyPIpytest-xdist3.8.0indirect
PyPIpython-dateutil2.9.0.post0indirect
PyPIpython-discovery1.5.1indirect
PyPIpython-on-whales0.81.0indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3indirect
PyPIrequests2.34.2indirect
PyPIrich15.0.0indirect
PyPIsetuptools83.0.0indirect
PyPIsetuptools-git1.2indirect
PyPIsix1.17.0indirect
PyPIslotscheck0.20.1indirect
PyPIsnowballstemmer3.1.1indirect
PyPIsphinx8.1.3indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-applehelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-devhelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-htmlhelp2.1.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-jsmath1.0.1indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-mermaid2.1.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-qthelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-serializinghtml2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-spelling8.0.2indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-towncrier0.5.0a0indirect
PyPItomli2.4.1indirect
PyPItowncrier25.8.0indirect
PyPItrustme1.2.1indirect
PyPItyping-inspection0.4.2indirect
PyPIurllib32.7.0indirect
PyPIuvloop0.22.1indirect
PyPIvalkey6.1.1indirect
PyPIvirtualenv21.7.1indirect
PyPIwheel0.47.0indirect
PyPIzlib-ng1.0.0indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:aiohttp@3.14.3 pulls in 8 packages, direct and transitive: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct dependencies.

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 v0.31.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticsPyPI.