Public record
Software health reportschema 0.14.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-19 07:22 UTC

mbk-dev / okama

Investment portfolio and stocks analyzing tools for Python with free historical data

PythonMIT★ 266 stars⑂ 44 forkssince Mar 2020View on GitHub ↗

mbk-dev/okama holds a health index of 16 out of 100, placing it in the Critical band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (95/100) and lowest on Security (10/100). It was last updated 4 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

16
overall / 100
Critical

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.

16
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 68 is calibrated to 80 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02). High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy applies a 20% multiplier to weighted overall health and gives it an At Risk ceiling of 34.

Ownership

MBK DevelopmentOrganization
29 followers13 public repossince Sep 2020

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
PyPIokama2.3.0-504 days agofinanceinvestmentsefficient-frontierpythonoptimization

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

94Exceptional · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 4 days ago
26.3/36Commit cadence38/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume326 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 20 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year326
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push4
active_weeks_last_year38

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases51 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 4 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~11.6 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count51
latest_release_tagv2.3.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release4
mean_days_between_releases11.6
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?

71Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
39.3/60Stars266 stars
13.6/25Forks44 forks
5.6/15Watchers11 watchers
Inputs used
forks44
stars266
watchers11
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

85Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

61Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
1/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 95% of commits
8.1/13.5Contributor breadth6 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled6
top_contributor_share0.954
How it's scored
41.2/42Issue resolution98% of issues closed
13.5/30PR acceptance14/31 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs14
open_issues1
closed_issues50
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0.98
closed_unmerged_prs17
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.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
10.6/25Owner reach29 followers of mbk-dev
20/25Track record13 public repos, account ~5 yr old
Inputs used
followers29
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginmbk-dev
public_repos13
account_age_days2,121
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 4 days ago
20/20Version history50 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesokama
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish4

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

95Exceptional · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Testsno data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://okama.io/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics14 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsfinance, investments, mathematics, python, optimization, portfolio-optimization, quantitative-finance, historical-data, portfolio, financial-data, cfa, time-series, markowitz, modern-portfolio-theory
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://okama.io/
docs_sitehttps://okama.io/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

10Critical · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0/2.5CI-Testsno data
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0.8/2.5Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
0/10Dangerous-Workflowno data
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 20 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesno data
0/5SASTno SAST tool detected
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsno data
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated12
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive6
scorecard_aggregate4.9
high_risk_jurisdiction_cap34
high_risk_jurisdiction_multiplier20
security_posture_after_multiplier10
security_posture_before_jurisdiction49
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): CI-Tests, Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. Remaining weights renormalized. High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy applies a 20% multiplier and gives Security posture an At risk ceiling of 34.

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.

74Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructionsAGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit historyno data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes9,836
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapdocs/Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno data
0/8Automated maintenanceno data
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesno data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesdocs/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice, Automated maintenance, OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codePython without a type-check config
52.4/55Manageable file sizes3/63 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes72,763
source_files_sampled63
oversized_source_files3
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, notebooks
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples, notebooks
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

266GitHub stars
6contributors
326commits, last 12 months
4days since last push
51releases
1bus factor
1open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.9 / 10
4.9aggregate

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 · 2026-07-19 07:22 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
n/aCI-Testsno pull request found
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 20 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
0SASTno SAST tool detected
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 10
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIpandas>=2.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpyarrow>=13.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIscipy*pyproject.toml
PyPImatplotlib>=3.5.1pyproject.toml
PyPIrequests*pyproject.toml
PyPIjoblib*pyproject.toml
PyPIpandas-stubs*pyproject.toml
PyPIarch>=7.2.0pyproject.toml
PyPIstatsmodels>=0.14.5pyproject.toml
PyPIidna>=3.15pyproject.toml
All dependencies 186

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 20 direct and 166 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIarchdirect
PyPIarch8.0.0direct
PyPIidnadirect
PyPIidna3.18direct
PyPIjoblibdirect
PyPIjoblib1.5.3direct
PyPImatplotlibdirect
PyPImatplotlib3.11.0direct
PyPIpandasdirect
PyPIpandas3.0.3direct
PyPIpandas-stubsdirect
PyPIpandas-stubs3.0.3.260530direct
PyPIpyarrowdirect
PyPIpyarrow25.0.0direct
PyPIrequestsdirect
PyPIrequests2.34.2direct
PyPIscipydirect
PyPIscipy1.17.1direct
PyPIstatsmodelsdirect
PyPIstatsmodels0.14.6direct
PyPIalabaster1.0.0indirect
PyPIanyio4.14.2indirect
PyPIappnope0.1.4indirect
PyPIargon2-cffi25.1.0indirect
PyPIargon2-cffi-bindings25.1.0indirect
PyPIarrow1.4.0indirect
PyPIasttokens3.0.2indirect
PyPIasync-lru2.3.0indirect
PyPIattrs26.1.0indirect
PyPIbabel2.18.0indirect
PyPIbeautifulsoup44.15.0indirect
PyPIblack26.5.1indirect
PyPIbleach6.4.0indirect
PyPIcertifi2026.6.17indirect
PyPIcffi2.1.0indirect
PyPIcfgv3.5.0indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.4.9indirect
PyPIclick8.4.2indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcomm0.2.3indirect
PyPIcommonmark0.9.2indirect
PyPIcontourpy1.3.3indirect
PyPIcycler0.12.1indirect
PyPIdebugpy1.8.21indirect
PyPIdecorator5.3.1indirect
PyPIdefusedxml0.7.1indirect
PyPIdistlib0.4.3indirect
PyPIdocutilsindirect
PyPIdocutils0.21.2indirect
PyPIexecnet2.1.2indirect
PyPIexecuting2.2.1indirect
PyPIfastjsonschema2.21.2indirect
PyPIfilelock3.29.7indirect
PyPIfonttools4.63.0indirect
PyPIfqdn1.5.1indirect
PyPIh110.16.0indirect
PyPIhttpcore1.0.9indirect
PyPIhttpx0.28.1indirect
PyPIidentify2.6.19indirect
PyPIimagesize1.5.0indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPIipykernel7.3.0indirect
PyPIipythonindirect
PyPIipython9.15.0indirect
PyPIipython-pygments-lexers1.1.1indirect
PyPIipywidgets8.1.8indirect
PyPIisoduration20.11.0indirect
PyPIjedi0.20.0indirect
PyPIjinja2indirect
PyPIjinja23.1.6indirect
PyPIjson50.15.0indirect
PyPIjsonpointer3.1.1indirect
PyPIjsonschema4.26.0indirect
PyPIjsonschema-specifications2025.9.1indirect
PyPIjupyter1.1.1indirect
PyPIjupyter-builder1.1.0indirect
PyPIjupyter-client8.9.1indirect
PyPIjupyter-console6.6.3indirect
PyPIjupyter-core5.9.1indirect
PyPIjupyter-events0.12.1indirect
PyPIjupyter-lsp2.3.1indirect
PyPIjupyter-server2.20.0indirect
PyPIjupyter-server-terminals0.5.4indirect
PyPIjupyterlab4.6.1indirect
PyPIjupyterlab-pygments0.3.0indirect
PyPIjupyterlab-server2.28.0indirect
PyPIjupyterlab-widgets3.0.16indirect
PyPIkiwisolver1.5.0indirect
PyPIlark1.3.1indirect
PyPImarkupsafe3.0.3indirect
PyPImatplotlib-inline0.2.2indirect
PyPImistune3.3.3indirect
PyPImypy-extensions1.1.0indirect
PyPInbclient0.11.0indirect
PyPInbconvert7.17.1indirect
PyPInbformat5.10.4indirect
PyPInbmake1.5.5indirect
PyPInbsphinxindirect
PyPInbsphinx0.9.8indirect
PyPInbsphinx-linkindirect
PyPInbsphinx-link1.4.1indirect
PyPInest-asyncio21.7.2indirect
PyPInodeenv1.10.0indirect
PyPInotebook7.6.0indirect
PyPInotebook-shim0.2.4indirect
PyPInumpy2.4.6indirect
PyPInumpy-typing-compat20251206.2.4indirect
PyPInumpydocindirect
PyPInumpydoc1.10.0indirect
PyPIoptype0.17.1indirect
PyPIoverrides7.7.0indirect
PyPIpackaging26.2indirect
PyPIpandocindirect
PyPIpandoc2.4indirect
PyPIpandocfilters1.5.1indirect
PyPIparso0.8.7indirect
PyPIpathspec1.1.1indirect
PyPIpatsy1.0.2indirect
PyPIpexpect4.9.0indirect
PyPIpillow12.3.0indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.10.0indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIplumbum2.0.1indirect
PyPIply3.11indirect
PyPIpre-commit4.6.0indirect
PyPIprometheus-client0.25.0indirect
PyPIprompt-toolkit3.0.52indirect
PyPIpsutil7.2.2indirect
PyPIptyprocess0.7.0indirect
PyPIpure-eval0.2.3indirect
PyPIpycparser3.0indirect
PyPIpygments2.20.0indirect
PyPIpyparsing3.3.2indirect
PyPIpytest9.1.1indirect
PyPIpytest-mock3.15.1indirect
PyPIpytest-xdist3.8.0indirect
PyPIpython-dateutil2.9.0.post0indirect
PyPIpython-discovery1.4.4indirect
PyPIpython-json-logger4.1.0indirect
PyPIpytokens0.4.1indirect
PyPIpywinpty3.0.5indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3indirect
PyPIpyzmq27.1.0indirect
PyPIrecommonmarkindirect
PyPIrecommonmark0.7.1indirect
PyPIreferencing0.37.0indirect
PyPIrfc3339-validator0.1.4indirect
PyPIrfc3986-validator0.1.1indirect
PyPIrfc3987-syntax1.1.0indirect
PyPIroman-numerals4.1.0indirect
PyPIroman-numerals-py4.1.0indirect
PyPIrpds-py2026.6.3indirect
PyPIruff0.15.21indirect
PyPIscipy-stubs1.17.1.5indirect
PyPIsend2trash2.1.0indirect
PyPIsix1.17.0indirect
PyPIsnowballstemmer3.1.1indirect
PyPIsoupsieve2.8.4indirect
PyPIsphinxindirect
PyPIsphinx8.2.3indirect
PyPIsphinx-rtd-themeindirect
PyPIsphinx-rtd-theme3.1.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-applehelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-devhelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-htmlhelp2.1.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-jquery4.1indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-jsmath1.0.1indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-qthelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-serializinghtml2.0.0indirect
PyPIstack-data0.6.3indirect
PyPIterminado0.18.1indirect
PyPItinycss21.5.1indirect
PyPItokenize-rt6.2.0indirect
PyPItornado6.5.7indirect
PyPItraitlets5.15.1indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.16.0indirect
PyPItzdata2026.3indirect
PyPIuri-template1.3.0indirect
PyPIurllib32.7.0indirect
PyPIvirtualenv21.6.1indirect
PyPIwcwidth0.8.2indirect
PyPIwebcolors25.10.0indirect
PyPIwebencodings0.5.1indirect
PyPIwebsocket-client1.9.0indirect
PyPIwidgetsnbextension4.0.15indirect
PyPIzmq0.0.0indirect
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 v0.14.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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