Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-23 02:03 UTC

man-group / ArcticDB

ArcticDB is a high performance, serverless DataFrame database built for the Python Data Science ecosystem.

C++ · PythonCustom license★ 2,553 stars⑂ 227 forkssince Nov 2022View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

man-group/ArcticDB holds a health index of 98 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Vitality (96/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (77/100). It was last updated today. 5 contributors account for most of its recent work.

98
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.

98
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 86 is calibrated to 98 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Man GroupOrganization
835 followers61 public repossince Nov 2013

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
PyPIarcticdb6.28.1118,3501122 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

96Exceptional · 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 — 434 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year434
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year52
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 100 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 2 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~4.5 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tagv6.28.2+man0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release2
mean_days_between_releases4.5

Community & Adoption

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

77Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
55.3/60Stars — 2,553 stars
19.6/25Forks — 227 forks
8.1/15Watchers — 30 watchers
Inputs used
forks227
stars2,553
watchers30
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
16.9/22.5License — license file present, not a recognized license
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges1
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
67.6/80Monthly downloads — 118,350 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesarcticdb
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads118,350
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?

85Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
45.9/54Bus factor — 5 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
19.6/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 13% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 42 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 22 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor5
contributors_sampled42
top_contributor_share0.131
How it's scored
29.5/42Issue resolution — 70% of issues closed
23.4/30PR acceptance — 1,850/2,370 decided PRs merged
10.8/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 5/6 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
15/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — all changesets reviewed
Inputs used
merged_prs1,850
open_issues315
closed_issues742
prs_merged_7d9
prs_decided_7d9
prs_merged_30d29
prs_decided_30d33
issue_closed_ratio0.702
closed_unmerged_prs520
first_time_authors_30d5
first_time_prs_merged_30d5
first_time_prs_decided_30d6
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
21/25Owner reach — 835 followers of man-group
25/25Track record — 61 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers835
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginman-group
public_repos61
account_age_days4,734

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 2 days ago
20/20Version history — 112 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesarcticdb
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish2

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

89Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 30 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff], [tool.black]), setup.cfg ([flake8])
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
18/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 27 out of 28 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — http://arcticdb.io
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 10 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsbig-data, data, data-analysis, data-science, database, pandas, dataframe, quantitative-analysis, quantitative-finance, quantitative-trading
has_wikiyes
homepagehttp://arcticdb.io
docs_sitehttp://arcticdb.io
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

78Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
6/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.2/2.5CI-Tests — 27 out of 28 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
7.5/7.5Code-Review — all changesets reviewed
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 22 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
5/5Fuzzing — project is fuzzed
2.2/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
4.5/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 9
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
3.8/7.5Vulnerabilities — 5 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated18
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive0
scorecard_aggregate7.3

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — no indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages11
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:arcticdb@6.28.1 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 11 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.

88Excellent · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — CLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 90 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.9
agent_instruction_filesCLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes12,490
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff], [tool.black]), setup.cfg ([flake8])
11/11Static type checking — C++ (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 15 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.15
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — C++ (statically typed)
53.6/55Manageable file sizes — 25/985 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageC++
largest_source_bytes222,125
source_files_sampled985
oversized_source_files25
How it's scored
40/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — cpp/proto/arcticc/pb2/azure_storage.proto, cpp/proto/arcticc/pb2/column_stats.proto, cpp/proto/arcticc/pb2/config.proto, cpp/proto/arcticc/pb2/descriptors.proto, cpp/proto/arcticc/pb2/encoding.proto, cpp/proto/arcticc/pb2/gcp_storage.proto, cpp/proto/arcticc/pb2/in_memory_storage.proto, cpp/proto/arcticc/pb2/lmdb_storage.proto, cpp/proto/arcticc/pb2/logger.proto, cpp/proto/arcticc/pb2/mapped_file_storage.proto, cpp/proto/arcticc/pb2/mongo_storage.proto, cpp/proto/arcticc/pb2/nfs_backed_storage.proto, cpp/proto/arcticc/pb2/s3_storage.proto, cpp/proto/arcticc/pb2/storage.proto, cpp/proto/arcticc/pb2/utils.proto
0/20MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examples — example, notebooks, sample
Inputs used
example_dirsexample, notebooks, sample
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_filescpp/proto/arcticc/pb2/azure_storage.proto, cpp/proto/arcticc/pb2/column_stats.proto, cpp/proto/arcticc/pb2/config.proto, cpp/proto/arcticc/pb2/descriptors.proto, cpp/proto/arcticc/pb2/encoding.proto, cpp/proto/arcticc/pb2/gcp_storage.proto, cpp/proto/arcticc/pb2/in_memory_storage.proto, cpp/proto/arcticc/pb2/lmdb_storage.proto, cpp/proto/arcticc/pb2/logger.proto, cpp/proto/arcticc/pb2/mapped_file_storage.proto, cpp/proto/arcticc/pb2/mongo_storage.proto, cpp/proto/arcticc/pb2/nfs_backed_storage.proto, cpp/proto/arcticc/pb2/s3_storage.proto, cpp/proto/arcticc/pb2/storage.proto, cpp/proto/arcticc/pb2/utils.proto
interfaces_expected_of—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

2,553GitHub stars
42contributors
434commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
100releases
5bus factor
315open 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 ★ / 227 ⇿
0Stars
227Forks
98Releases

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.

0408012016020024022562023-032024-122026-10
Major 0Minor 52Patch 46

Each point covers 4 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 7.3 / 10
7.3aggregate

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 · 2026-10-23 02:01 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
8Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
9CI-Tests27 out of 28 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
10Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
10Contributorsproject has 22 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
10Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
9Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 2 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
9SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 9
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
5Vulnerabilities5 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 8
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIpandas<3setup.cfg
PyPInumpy—setup.cfg
PyPIattrs—setup.cfg
PyPIprotobuf>=3.15.0, < 7 # Minimum required for optional supportsetup.cfg
PyPImsgpack>=0.5.0 # msgpack 0.5.0 is required for strict_types argument, needed for correct pickling fallbacksetup.cfg
PyPIpyyaml—setup.cfg
PyPIpackaging—setup.cfg
PyPIpytz—setup.cfg
All dependencies 33

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 15 direct and 18 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIattrs—direct
PyPIattrs23.1.0direct
PyPImsgpack—direct
PyPImsgpack1.0.5direct
PyPInumpy—direct
PyPInumpy1.24.4direct
PyPIpackaging—direct
PyPIpackaging24.2direct
PyPIpandas—direct
PyPIpandas2.1.4direct
PyPIprotobuf—direct
PyPIprotobuf4.25.1direct
PyPIpytz—direct
PyPIpyyaml—direct
PyPIpyyaml6.0.1direct
PyPIarcticdb—indirect
PyPIarcticdb1.6.2indirect
PyPIarcticdb4.5.1indirect
PyPIarcticdb5.0.0indirect
PyPIarcticdb5.1.2indirect
PyPIarcticdb5.2.4indirect
PyPIarcticdb5.3.4indirect
PyPIarcticdb5.4.1indirect
PyPIarcticdb5.5.1indirect
PyPIarcticdb5.6.0indirect
PyPIarcticdb5.7.0indirect
PyPIarcticdb5.8.0indirect
PyPIarcticdb5.9.3indirect
PyPIarcticdb6.1.1indirect
PyPIprometheus-client—indirect
PyPIprometheus-client0.21.1indirect
PyPIpyarrow—indirect
PyPIpytest—indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:arcticdb@6.28.1 pulls in 11 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 v0.34.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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