Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-18 21:20 UTC

element-hq / element-android

A Matrix collaboration client for Android.

KotlinAGPL-3.0★ 3,730 stars⑂ 918 forkssince Oct 2018View on GitHub ↗
KindMobile applicationhow this is determined
#hacktoberfest#matrix#element-android

element-hq/element-android holds a health index of 93 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Vitality (88/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (54/100). It was last updated today. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

93
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.

93
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 79 is calibrated to 93 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

ElementOrganization
3,502 followers146 public repossince Jul 2015

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?

88Excellent · 21% of overall

Development activity

86Excellent
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
21.5/36Commit cadence — 31/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 148 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 5 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year148
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year31

Release discipline

90Excellent
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 100 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 1 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~39.7 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tagv1.6.64
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release1
mean_days_between_releases39.7

Community & Adoption

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

86Excellent · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

93Exceptional
How it's scored
57.9/60Stars — 3,730 stars
24.7/25Forks — 918 forks
10.7/15Watchers — 85 watchers
Inputs used
forks918
stars3,730
watchers85
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 (AGPL-3.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges6
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io, sonarcloud.io
has_pull_request_templateyes

Sustainability & Governance

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

68Good · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

61Moderate
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
12.6/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 44% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 99 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 38 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled99
top_contributor_share0.438

Issue & PR responsiveness

66Good
How it's scored
24.1/42Issue resolution — 57% of issues closed
25.4/30PR acceptance — 3,344/3,948 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 1/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
3/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 4/15 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
merged_prs3,344
open_issues2,181
closed_issues2,923
prs_merged_7d2
prs_decided_7d2
prs_merged_30d3
prs_decided_30d3
issue_closed_ratio0.573
closed_unmerged_prs604
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d1
first_time_prs_decided_30d1

Ownership & stewardship

80Excellent
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
25/25Owner reach — 3,502 followers of element-hq
25/25Track record — 146 public repos, account ~11 yr old
Inputs used
followers3,502
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginelement-hq
public_repos146
account_age_days4,076

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

84Excellent · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

74Good
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 13 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 4 out of 4 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://element.io/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 3 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicshacktoberfest, matrix, element-android
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://element.io/
docs_sitehttps://element.io/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

75Good · 16% of overall

Security posture

69Good
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 4 out of 4 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
1.5/7.5Code-Review — Found 4/15 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 38 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 5 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
3/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 6
5/5SAST — SAST tool is run on all commits
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
7.5/7.5Token-Permissions — GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
2.2/7.5Vulnerabilities — 7 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate6.9
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, 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
advisories7
affected_packages6
assessed_packages102
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityhigh 3, moderate 3
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 102 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.

54Moderate · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

13Critical
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
13.3/40Legible commit history — 25 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.25
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

67Good
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — build.gradle, library/attachment-viewer/build.gradle, library/core-utils/build.gradle (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — Kotlin (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
5/8Automated maintenance — dependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesGemfile.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsbuild.gradle, library/attachment-viewer/build.gradle, library/core-utils/build.gradle, library/external/autocomplete/build.gradle, library/external/barcodescanner/core/build.gradle, library/external/barcodescanner/zxing/build.gradle, library/external/dialpad/build.gradle, library/external/diff-match-patch/build.gradle, library/external/jsonviewer/build.gradle, library/external/realmfieldnameshelper/build.gradle, library/external/span/build.gradle, library/external/textdrawable/build.gradle, library/multipicker/build.gradle, library/rustCrypto/build.gradle, library/ui-strings/build.gradle, library/ui-styles/build.gradle, matrix-sdk-android-flow/build.gradle, matrix-sdk-android/build.gradle, vector-app/build.gradle, vector-config/build.gradle, vector/build.gradle
dependency_bot_commit_share0

Code legibility for models

100Exceptional
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Kotlin (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 3/4,242 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageKotlin
largest_source_bytes99,703
source_files_sampled4,242
oversized_source_files3

Key facts

3,730GitHub stars
99contributors
148commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
100releases
2bus factor
2,181open issues
Maven, RubyGemspackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 918 ⇿
0Stars
918Forks
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.

02004006008001,00080382018-102022-102026-09
Major 0Minor 3Patch 94

Each point covers 8 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.9 / 10
6.9aggregate

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 · 2026-09-18 21:20 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-Tests4 out of 4 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2Code-ReviewFound 4/15 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
10Contributorsproject has 38 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 5 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
6Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 6
10SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
3Vulnerabilities7 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 2
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
RubyGemsfastlane—Gemfile
RubyGemsdanger—Gemfile
All dependencies 102

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 2 direct and 100 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
RubyGemsdanger8.6.1direct
RubyGemsfastlane2.221.1direct
RubyGemsaddressable2.8.7indirect
RubyGemsartifactory3.0.17indirect
RubyGemsatomos0.1.3indirect
RubyGemsaws-eventstream1.3.0indirect
RubyGemsaws-partitions1.947.0indirect
RubyGemsaws-sdk-core3.199.0indirect
RubyGemsaws-sdk-kms1.87.0indirect
RubyGemsaws-sdk-s31.154.0indirect
RubyGemsaws-sigv41.8.0indirect
RubyGemsbabosa1.0.4indirect
RubyGemsbase640.2.0indirect
RubyGemsCFPropertyList3.0.7indirect
RubyGemsclaide1.1.0indirect
RubyGemsclaide-plugins0.9.2indirect
RubyGemscolored1.2indirect
RubyGemscolored23.1.2indirect
RubyGemscommander4.6.0indirect
RubyGemscork0.3.0indirect
RubyGemsdeclarative0.0.20indirect
RubyGemsdigest-crc0.6.5indirect
RubyGemsdomain_name0.5.20190701indirect
RubyGemsdotenv2.8.1indirect
RubyGemsemoji_regex3.2.3indirect
RubyGemsexcon0.109.0indirect
RubyGemsfaraday1.10.3indirect
RubyGemsfaraday-cookie_jar0.0.7indirect
RubyGemsfaraday-em_http1.0.0indirect
RubyGemsfaraday-em_synchrony1.0.0indirect
RubyGemsfaraday-excon1.1.0indirect
RubyGemsfaraday-http-cache2.5.1indirect
RubyGemsfaraday-httpclient1.0.1indirect
RubyGemsfaraday-multipart1.0.4indirect
RubyGemsfaraday-net_http1.0.1indirect
RubyGemsfaraday-net_http_persistent1.2.0indirect
RubyGemsfaraday-patron1.0.0indirect
RubyGemsfaraday-rack1.0.0indirect
RubyGemsfaraday-retry1.0.3indirect
RubyGemsfaraday_middleware1.2.0indirect
RubyGemsfastimage2.3.1indirect
RubyGemsgh_inspector1.1.3indirect
RubyGemsgit1.19.1indirect
RubyGemsgoogle-apis-androidpublisher_v30.54.0indirect
RubyGemsgoogle-apis-core0.11.3indirect
RubyGemsgoogle-apis-iamcredentials_v10.17.0indirect
RubyGemsgoogle-apis-playcustomapp_v10.13.0indirect
RubyGemsgoogle-apis-storage_v10.29.0indirect
RubyGemsgoogle-cloud-core1.6.1indirect
RubyGemsgoogle-cloud-env1.6.0indirect
RubyGemsgoogle-cloud-errors1.3.1indirect
RubyGemsgoogle-cloud-storage1.45.0indirect
RubyGemsgoogleauth1.8.1indirect
RubyGemshighline2.0.3indirect
RubyGemshttp-cookie1.0.6indirect
RubyGemshttpclient2.8.3indirect
RubyGemsjmespath1.6.2indirect
RubyGemsjson2.7.2indirect
RubyGemsjwt2.8.2indirect
RubyGemskramdown2.4.0indirect
RubyGemskramdown-parser-gfm1.1.0indirect
RubyGemsmini_magick4.13.1indirect
RubyGemsmini_mime1.1.5indirect
RubyGemsmulti_json1.15.0indirect
RubyGemsmultipart-post2.4.1indirect
RubyGemsnanaimo0.3.0indirect
RubyGemsnap1.1.0indirect
RubyGemsnaturally2.2.1indirect
RubyGemsnkf0.2.0indirect
RubyGemsno_proxy_fix0.1.2indirect
RubyGemsoctokit4.25.1indirect
RubyGemsopen41.3.4indirect
RubyGemsoptparse0.5.0indirect
RubyGemsos1.1.4indirect
RubyGemsplist3.7.1indirect
RubyGemspublic_suffix5.1.1indirect
RubyGemsrake13.2.1indirect
RubyGemsrchardet1.8.0indirect
RubyGemsrepresentable3.2.0indirect
RubyGemsretriable3.1.2indirect
RubyGemsrexml3.3.9indirect
RubyGemsrouge2.0.7indirect
RubyGemsruby2_keywords0.0.5indirect
RubyGemsrubyzip2.3.2indirect
RubyGemssawyer0.9.2indirect
RubyGemssecurity0.1.5indirect
RubyGemssignet0.18.0indirect
RubyGemssimctl1.6.10indirect
RubyGemsterminal-notifier2.0.0indirect
RubyGemsterminal-table3.0.2indirect
RubyGemstrailblazer-option0.1.2indirect
RubyGemstty-cursor0.7.1indirect
RubyGemstty-screen0.8.2indirect
RubyGemstty-spinner0.9.3indirect
RubyGemsuber0.1.0indirect
RubyGemsunf0.1.4indirect
RubyGemsunf_ext0.0.9.1indirect
RubyGemsunicode-display_width2.5.0indirect
RubyGemsword_wrap1.0.0indirect
RubyGemsxcodeproj1.25.1indirect
RubyGemsxcpretty0.3.0indirect
RubyGemsxcpretty-travis-formatter1.0.1indirect
Dependency advisories 6

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 102 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 6 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
addressable2.8.7indirecthigh12.9.0
faraday1.10.3indirecthigh22.14.3
jwt2.8.2indirecthigh13.2.0
aws-sdk-s31.154.0indirectmoderate11.208.0
excon0.109.0indirectmoderate11.5.0
rexml3.3.9indirectmoderate13.4.2

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.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with element-hq/element-android. Read them side by side →

98matrix-org/matrix-js-sdkMatrix Client-Server SDK for JavaScriptExceptional98element-hq/element-webA glossy Matrix collaboration client for the web.Exceptional98mattermost/mattermost-mobileNext generation iOS and Android apps for Mattermost in React NativeExceptional99open-telemetry/opentelemetry-rubyOpenTelemetry Ruby API & SDK, and related gemsExceptional98nrwl/nxThe Monorepo Platform that amplifies both developers and AI agents. Nx optimizes your builds, scales your CI, and fixes failed PRs automatically. Ship in half the time.Exceptional98apache/foryA blazingly fast multi-language serialization framework for idiomatic domain objects, schema IDL, and cross-language data exchange.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 v0.34.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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