Public record
Software health reportschema 0.12.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-17 18:02 UTC

alloy-rs / alloy

Transports, Middleware, and Networks for the Alloy project

RustApache-2.0★ 1,305 stars⑂ 642 forkssince Apr 2023View on GitHub ↗
#blockchain#ethereum

alloy-rs/alloy holds a health index of 94 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Vitality (100/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (51/100). It was last updated today. 3 contributors account for most of its recent work.

94
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.

94
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 80 is calibrated to 94 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

AlloyOrganization
876 followers21 public repossince Mar 2023

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?

100Exceptional · 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 — 807 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 4 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year807
human_commit_share—
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year52

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 100 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~12.5 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tagv2.2.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases12.5
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?

79Good · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

81Excellent
How it's scored
50.5/60Stars — 1,305 stars
23.4/25Forks — 642 forks
7/15Watchers — 19 watchers
Inputs used
forks642
stars1,305
watchers19
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

77Good
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges—
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateyes

Sustainability & Governance

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

79Good · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

74Good
How it's scored
36/54Bus factor — 3 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
15/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 33% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 100 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 20 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor3
contributors_sampled100
top_contributor_share0.333

Issue & PR responsiveness

81Excellent
How it's scored
38.9/42Issue resolution — 92% of issues closed
24.1/30PR acceptance — 2,568/3,200 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
7.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 16/28 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
merged_prs2,568
open_issues59
closed_issues729
prs_merged_7d—
prs_decided_7d—
prs_merged_30d—
prs_decided_30d—
issue_closed_ratio0.925
closed_unmerged_prs632
first_time_authors_30d—
first_time_prs_merged_30d—
first_time_prs_decided_30d—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

84Excellent
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain — verified-domain status not read for this organization
21.2/25Owner reach — 876 followers of alloy-rs
16.4/25Track record — 21 public repos, account ~3 yr old
Inputs used
followers876
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified—
owner_loginalloy-rs
public_repos21
account_age_days1,218
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

61Moderate · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

58Moderate
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
10/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 12 out of 23 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

65Good
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://alloy.rs
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 2 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsblockchain, ethereum
has_wikino
homepagehttps://alloy.rs
docs_sitehttps://alloy.rs
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

84Excellent · 16% of overall

Security posture

84Excellent
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
1.2/2.5CI-Tests — 12 out of 23 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3.8/7.5Code-Review — Found 16/28 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 20 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 4 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
5/5Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
4.5/5SAST — SAST tool detected but not run on all commits
4.5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
7.5/7.5Token-Permissions — GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate8.4
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging, Signed-Releases. 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.

51Moderate · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

1Critical
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit history — no data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share—
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

53Moderate
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — Rust (statically typed)
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no data
5/8Automated maintenance — dependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share—
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice. Remaining weights renormalized.

Code legibility for models

98Exceptional
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Rust (statically typed)
53.5/55Manageable file sizes — 10/376 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes614,370
source_files_sampled376
oversized_source_files10

Machine-readable interfaces

100Exceptional
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examples — examples
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

1,305GitHub stars
100contributors
807commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
100releases
3bus factor
59open issues
crates.iopackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 8.4 / 10
8.4aggregate

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 · 2026-07-17 18:02 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
5CI-Tests12 out of 23 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
5Code-ReviewFound 16/28 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
10Contributorsproject has 20 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 4 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
10Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
9SASTSAST tool detected but not run on all commits
9Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 29

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 29 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
crates.ioarbitrary—indirect
crates.ioaws-config—indirect
crates.ioaws-sdk-kms—indirect
crates.iobytes—indirect
crates.iocoins-bip32—indirect
crates.iocoins-bip39—indirect
crates.iocoins-ledger—indirect
crates.iodarling—indirect
crates.iodashmap—indirect
crates.iodirs—indirect
crates.ioeth-keystore—indirect
crates.iogovernor—indirect
crates.iohttp—indirect
crates.iointerprocess—indirect
crates.iolibc—indirect
crates.ioopentelemetry—indirect
crates.ioopentelemetry-http—indirect
crates.ioproc-macro2—indirect
crates.ioquote—indirect
crates.iorustls—indirect
crates.iosyn—indirect
crates.iotempfile—indirect
crates.iotoml—indirect
crates.iotracing-opentelemetry—indirect
crates.iotrezor-client0.1.6indirect
crates.ioturnkey_client—indirect
crates.iowasm-bindgen-futures—indirect
crates.iows_stream_wasm—indirect
crates.ioyubihsm—indirect
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.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with alloy-rs/alloy. Read them side by side →

96foundry-rs/foundryFoundry is a blazing fast, portable and modular toolkit for Ethereum application development written in Rust.Exceptional96paradigmxyz/rethModular, contributor-friendly and blazing-fast implementation of the Ethereum protocol, in RustExceptional94moonbeam-foundation/moonbeamAn Ethereum-compatible smart contract parachain on PolkadotExceptional94bluealloy/revmRust implementation of the Ethereum Virtual Machine.Exceptional94lambdaclass/ethrexMinimalist, stable, modular, fast, and ZK native implementation of the Ethereum protocol in Rust. L1 and L2 execution client.Exceptional93succinctlabs/sp1SP1 is a zero‑knowledge virtual machine that proves the correct execution of programs compiled for the RISC-V architecture.Exceptional

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 v0.12.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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