Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-12 08:22 UTC

nuxt / modules

Discover the Nuxt modules to add any CMS, Database, UI, Auth and integrations into your Vue application.

TypeScriptMIT★ 1,053 stars⑂ 361 forkssince Aug 2020View on GitHub ↗

nuxt/modules holds a health index of 91 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (88/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (61/100). It was last updated today. 4 contributors account for most of its recent work.

91
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.

91
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 77 is calibrated to 91 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

NuxtOrganization · verified domain
4,796 followers65 public repossince Nov 2016

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
npm@nuxt/modules0.6.0-d486752,49167337 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

74Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
27/36Commit cadence — 39/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 199 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 29 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year199
human_commit_share0.55
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year39
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases — 3 version tags (no GitHub releases)
0/36Release recency — latest release 2,232 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~1.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count3
latest_release_tagv0.3.0
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release2,232
mean_days_between_releases1.4
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?

76Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
49/60Stars — 1,053 stars
21.3/25Forks — 361 forks
5/15Watchers — 9 watchers
Inputs used
forks361
stars1,053
watchers9
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
45.3/80Monthly downloads — 2,491 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packages@nuxt/modules
dependents—
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads2,491
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?

88Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
43.2/54Bus factor — 4 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
18.7/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 17% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 99 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 91 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor4
contributors_sampled99
top_contributor_share0.169
How it's scored
26.2/42Issue resolution — 62% of issues closed
25.3/30PR acceptance — 814/966 decided PRs merged
8.7/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 4/6 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
7.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 9/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
merged_prs814
open_issues219
closed_issues365
prs_merged_7d5
prs_decided_7d5
prs_merged_30d9
prs_decided_30d11
issue_closed_ratio0.625
closed_unmerged_prs152
first_time_authors_30d5
first_time_prs_merged_30d4
first_time_prs_decided_30d6
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20Verified domain
25/25Owner reach — 4,796 followers of nuxt
25/25Track record — 65 public repos, account ~9 yr old
Inputs used
followers4,796
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginnuxt
public_repos65
account_age_days3,623

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on npm
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 37 days ago
20/20Version history — 673 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packages@nuxt/modules
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish37

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

62Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 6 workflow(s)
0/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — eslint.config.mjs
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 26 out of 26 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsno
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://nuxt.com/modules
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 4 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsnuxt, nuxt-module, vue, integration
has_wikino
homepagehttps://nuxt.com/modules
docs_sitehttps://nuxt.com/modules
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

87Excellent · 16% of overall

Security posture

84Excellent
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 — 26 out of 26 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
3.8/7.5Code-Review — Found 9/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 91 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 29 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
5/5Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
3/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 6
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
7.5/7.5Token-Permissions — GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate8.4
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging, Signed-Releases. 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
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages9
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
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 9 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.

61Moderate · 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://nuxt.com/llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 55 of 55 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://nuxt.com/llms.txt
legible_history_share1
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
0/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — eslint.config.mjs
11/11Static type checking — tsconfig.json
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance — 44 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsno
lockfilespnpm-lock.yaml
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configstsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.44
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — TypeScript (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/7 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageTypeScript
largest_source_bytes15,876
source_files_sampled7
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

1,053GitHub stars
99contributors
199commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
3releases
4bus factor
219open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 361 ⇿
0Stars
361Forks

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.

012525037535752020-102023-102026-10

Each point covers 6 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 8.4 / 10
8.4aggregate

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 08:22 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-Tests26 out of 26 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
5Code-ReviewFound 9/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
10Contributorsproject has 91 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 29 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
10Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
6SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 6
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 9

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 9 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@pnpm/exe.darwin-arm6412.3.4indirect
npm@pnpm/exe.darwin-x6412.3.4indirect
npm@pnpm/exe.linux-arm6412.3.4indirect
npm@pnpm/exe.linux-arm64-musl12.3.4indirect
npm@pnpm/exe.linux-x6412.3.4indirect
npm@pnpm/exe.linux-x64-musl12.3.4indirect
npm@pnpm/exe.win32-arm6412.3.4indirect
npm@pnpm/exe.win32-x6412.3.4indirect
npmpnpm12.3.4indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 9 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

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 — npm.