Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-14 13:59 UTC

laravel / breeze

Minimal Laravel authentication scaffolding with Blade, Vue, or React + Tailwind.

Vue · PHP · BladeMIT★ 3,059 stars⑂ 548 forkssince Nov 2020View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolhow this is determined

laravel/breeze holds a health index of 86 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (92/100) and lowest on Security (50/100). It was last updated today. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

86
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.

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

Ownership

LaravelOrganization · verified domain
11,149 followers144 public repossince Aug 2011

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
Packagistlaravel/breezev2.4.22,607,287130152 days agoauthlaravel

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

65Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
4.8/36Commit cadence — 7/52 weeks with commits
11.7/18Commit volume — 19 commits in the last year
1/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
commits_last_year19
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year7
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 100 releases published
27/36Release recency — latest release 147 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~53.7 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tagv2.4.2
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release147
mean_days_between_releases53.7
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?

92Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
56.5/60Stars — 3,059 stars
22.8/25Forks — 548 forks
9.8/15Watchers — 59 watchers
Inputs used
forks548
stars3,059
watchers59
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

92Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads — 2,607,287 downloads/month across packagist
15.2/20Registry dependents — 191 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packageslaravel/breeze
dependents191
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads43,604,420
monthly_downloads2,607,287
unverified_packages_excluded—

Sustainability & Governance

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

80Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
14.8/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 34% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 100 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 23 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled100
top_contributor_share0.34
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — no issues or no data
18.4/30PR acceptance — 303/493 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 1/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
6/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 10/25 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
merged_prs303
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d1
prs_decided_7d1
prs_merged_30d1
prs_decided_30d1
issue_closed_ratio—
closed_unmerged_prs190
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d1
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20Verified domain
25/25Owner reach — 11,149 followers of laravel
25/25Track record — 144 public repos, account ~15 yr old
Inputs used
followers11,149
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginlaravel
public_repos144
account_age_days5,550

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on packagist
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 152 days ago
20/20Version history — 130 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packageslaravel/breeze
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish152

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

76Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 7 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .eslintrc.cjs, .eslintrc.json
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
14/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 12 out of 16 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://laravel.com/docs/starter-kits#laravel-breeze
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 2 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicslaravel, auth
has_wikino
homepagehttps://laravel.com/docs/starter-kits#laravel-breeze
docs_sitehttps://laravel.com/docs/starter-kits#laravel-breeze
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
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
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
2.2/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
1.8/2.5CI-Tests — 12 out of 16 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3/7.5Code-Review — Found 10/25 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 23 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — no data
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
0.8/7.5Maintained — 2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — no data
2/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 4
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — no data
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated13
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive5
scorecard_aggregate5
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): 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.

52Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
34.1/40Legible commit history — 64 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.64
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .eslintrc.cjs, .eslintrc.json
11/11Static type checking — stubs/inertia-common/jsconfig.json, stubs/inertia-react-ts/tsconfig.json, stubs/inertia-vue-ts/tsconfig.json
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
5/8Automated maintenance — dependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configsstubs/inertia-common/jsconfig.json, stubs/inertia-react-ts/tsconfig.json, stubs/inertia-vue-ts/tsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Vue with type-check config (stubs/inertia-common/jsconfig.json, stubs/inertia-react-ts/tsconfig.json, stubs/inertia-vue-ts/tsconfig.json)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/235 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageVue
largest_source_bytes32,016
source_files_sampled235
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

3,059GitHub stars
100contributors
19commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
100releases
2bus factor
0open issues
Packagistpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 548 ⇿
0Stars
548Forks
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.

0100200300400500600535322020-112023-102026-09
Major 1Minor 29Patch 70

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 · 2026-10-14 13:58 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
7CI-Tests12 out of 16 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
4Code-ReviewFound 10/25 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
10Contributorsproject has 23 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
1Maintained2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
4SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 4
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 5
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistilluminate/console^11.0|^12.0|^13.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/filesystem^11.0|^12.0|^13.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/support^11.0|^12.0|^13.0composer.json
Packagistilluminate/validation^11.0|^12.0|^13.0composer.json
Packagistsymfony/console^7.0|^8.0composer.json
All dependencies 9

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 5 direct and 4 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistilluminate/console—direct
Packagistilluminate/filesystem—direct
Packagistilluminate/support—direct
Packagistilluminate/validation—direct
Packagistsymfony/console—direct
Packagistlaravel/framework—indirect
Packagistorchestra/testbench-core—indirect
Packagistphp—indirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstan—indirect
Dependency advisories not assessed

Advisory matching could not run for this report: No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

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 — Packagist.