Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-12 08:32 UTC

newsdataapi / python-client

Official Python client (SDK) for the Newsdata.io News API — fetch real-time, historical, crypto, and stock-market news via REST, with validation, retries, pagination, and typed exceptions.

PythonMIT★ 18 stars⑂ 3 forkssince Mar 2021View on GitHub ↗

newsdataapi/python-client holds a health index of 69 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (82/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (35/100). It was last updated today. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

69
overall / 100
Good

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.

69
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 62 is calibrated to 69 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

NewsData.ioPersonal account
13 followers12 public repossince Mar 2021NewsData.io

This repository is owned by a personal account. A single-owner project carries more continuity risk than an organization-backed one.

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
PyPInewsdataapipoints to another repo — not scored0.3.34,077370 days agoapi-clientcrypto-newsfinancial-newsmarket-newsnewsnews-aggregatornews-apinews-streamnewsdatanewsdata-iopython-sdkrealtime-newsrest-apisdkwebsocketwebsockets

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

82Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
9/36Commit cadence — 13/52 weeks with commits
15.2/18Commit volume — 48 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 17 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year48
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year13

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 35 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~38.6 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count35
latest_release_tag0.3.3
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases38.6
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?

35Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
20/60Stars — 18 stars
2.5/25Forks — 3 forks
0/15Watchers — 2 watchers
Inputs used
forks3
stars18
watchers2
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges6
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

60Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
11.7/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 48% of commits
5.4/13.5Contributor breadth — 4 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled4
top_contributor_share0.481
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed
30/30PR acceptance — 26/26 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/15 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs26
open_issues0
closed_issues3
prs_merged_7d1
prs_decided_7d1
prs_merged_30d2
prs_decided_30d2
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs0
first_time_authors_30d0
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
8.2/25Owner reach — 13 followers of newsdataapi
19.2/25Track record — 12 public repos, account ~5 yr old
Inputs used
followers13
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginnewsdataapi
public_repos12
account_age_days2,028
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

80Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 8 out of 8 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://newsdata.io/documentation
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 15 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsnews, newsapi, python, api-client, crypto-news, financial-news, market-news, news-aggregator, news-api, newsdata, newsdata-io, python-client, python-sdk, rest-api, sdk
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://newsdata.io/documentation
docs_sitehttps://newsdata.io/documentation
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
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 8 out of 8 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
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/15 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 17 commit(s) and 0 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
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
7.5/7.5Token-Permissions — GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 13 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate4.6
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
17.2/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 2 affected: requests 2.32.4 (moderate 5.5), requests 2.32.5 (moderate 5.5)
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
31.4/40No advisories left outstanding — 2 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 200 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories36
affected_packages7
assessed_packages40
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityhigh 2, moderate 5
direct_affected_packages2
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 40 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.

58Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://newsdata.io/llms-full.txt)
17.1/40Legible commit history — 32 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://newsdata.io/llms-full.txt
legible_history_share0.32
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
11/11Static type checking — src/newsdataapi/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
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
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configssrc/newsdataapi/py.typed
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (src/newsdataapi/py.typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/13 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes51,677
source_files_sampled13
oversized_source_files0
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

18GitHub stars
4contributors
48commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
35releases
2bus factor
0open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • pypi package 'newsdataapi' points at a different repository (https://github.com/bytesview/python-client); excluded from ecosystem scoring
  • deps.dev does not index pypi:newsdataapi@0.3.3; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 3 ⇿
0Stars
3Forks
7Releases

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.

12233312022-052023-042024-03
Major 0Minor 0Patch 7

Each point covers 2 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.6 / 10
4.6aggregate

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 · 2026-10-12 08:31 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests8 out of 8 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/15 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained17 commit(s) and 0 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
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
0Vulnerabilities13 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 2
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIrequests>=2.25,<3pyproject.toml
PyPIwebsockets>=16,<17pyproject.toml
All dependencies 40

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 4 direct and 36 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIrequests2.32.4direct
PyPIrequests2.32.5direct
PyPIrequests2.33.1direct
PyPIwebsockets16.0direct
PyPIcertifi2026.4.22indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.4.7indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcoverage7.10.7indirect
PyPIcoverage7.13.5indirect
PyPIcoverage7.6.1indirect
PyPIexceptiongroup1.3.1indirect
PyPIidna3.13indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.1.0indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPIlibrt0.10.0indirect
PyPImypy1.14.1indirect
PyPImypy1.19.1indirect
PyPImypy1.20.2indirect
PyPImypy-extensions1.1.0indirect
PyPIpackaging26.2indirect
PyPIpathspec1.1.1indirect
PyPIpluggy1.5.0indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIpygments2.20.0indirect
PyPIpytest8.3.5indirect
PyPIpytest8.4.2indirect
PyPIpytest9.0.3indirect
PyPIpytest-cov5.0.0indirect
PyPIpytest-cov7.1.0indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3indirect
PyPIresponses0.26.0indirect
PyPIruff0.15.12indirect
PyPItomli2.4.1indirect
PyPItypes-requests2.32.0.20241016indirect
PyPItypes-requests2.32.4.20260107indirect
PyPItypes-requests2.33.0.20260503indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.13.2indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.15.0indirect
PyPIurllib32.2.3indirect
PyPIurllib32.6.3indirect
Dependency advisories 7

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 40 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 7 carry known advisories, of which 2 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
urllib32.2.3indirecthigh162.8.0
urllib32.6.3indirecthigh102.8.0
requests2.32.4directmoderate22.33.0
requests2.32.5directmoderate22.33.0
idna3.13indirectmoderate23.15
pytest8.3.5indirectmoderate29.0.3
pytest8.4.2indirectmoderate29.0.3

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.