Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-19 10:19 UTC

opensanctions / nomenklatura

Framework and command-line tools for integrating FollowTheMoney data streams from multiple sources

PythonMIT★ 260 stars⑂ 46 forkssince Jul 2012View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryTerminal interfacehow this is determined

opensanctions/nomenklatura holds a health index of 93 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Vitality (98/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (60/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

93
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.

93
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 79 is calibrated to 93 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

OpenSanctionsOrganization
230 followers34 public repossince May 2021

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
PyPInomenklatura4.13.134,7032240 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

98Exceptional · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
33.2/36Commit cadence48/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume532 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 6 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year532
human_commit_share0.98
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year48

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases2 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~30.9 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count2
latest_release_tag4.13.1
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases30.9
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?

60Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
39.1/60Stars260 stars
13.8/25Forks46 forks
6.7/15Watchers17 watchers
Inputs used
forks46
stars260
watchers17
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized 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_badges0
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
60.5/80Monthly downloads34,703 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesnomenklatura
dependents
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads
monthly_downloads34,703
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?

70Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
3/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 87% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth15 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 21 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled15
top_contributor_share0.867
How it's scored
39.3/42Issue resolution94% of issues closed
22.5/30PR acceptance196/261 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/15 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs196
open_issues6
closed_issues86
prs_merged_7d4
prs_decided_7d4
prs_merged_30d12
prs_decided_30d12
issue_closed_ratio0.935
closed_unmerged_prs65
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
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
17/25Owner reach230 followers of opensanctions
21.7/25Track record34 public repos, account ~5 yr old
Inputs used
followers230
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginopensanctions
public_repos34
account_age_days1,905
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 0 days ago
20/20Version history224 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesnomenklatura
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

92Excellent · 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
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests10 out of 10 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttp://nomenklatura.followthemoney.tech/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics3 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsdata-integration, deduplication, record-link
has_wikino
homepagehttp://nomenklatura.followthemoney.tech/
docs_sitehttp://nomenklatura.followthemoney.tech/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

72Good · 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
2.5/2.5CI-Tests10 out of 10 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 0/15 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 21 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
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 6 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
3.5/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 7
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
7.5/7.5Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate6.5
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages1
unassessed_packages16
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 1 resolved dependencies against OSV. 16 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list. 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.

80Excellent · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructionsCLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
34.3/40Legible commit history63 of 98 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.643
agent_instruction_filesCLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes3,826
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapMakefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingnomenklatura/py.typed
0/10Reproducible environment
10/10Demonstrated agent practice31 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance2 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configsnomenklatura/py.typed
agent_commit_share0.31
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0.02
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable codePython with type-check config (nomenklatura/py.typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/187 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes30,309
source_files_sampled187
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

260GitHub stars
15contributors
532commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
2releases
1bus factor
6open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • deps.dev does not index pypi:nomenklatura@4.13.1; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 46 ⇿
0Stars
46Forks
1Releases

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.

010203040504222012-072019-072026-07
Major 0Minor 1Patch 0

Each point covers 13 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.5 / 10
6.5aggregate

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 · 2026-08-19 10:18 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests10 out of 10 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 21 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 6 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
7SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 7
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 12
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIfollowthemoney>= 4.8.1, < 5.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIrigour>= 2.2.3, < 3.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIfingerprints>= 1.3.1, < 2.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIshortuuid>= 1.0.11, < 2.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIrich>= 13.0.0, < 16.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPItextual>= 3.0.0, < 9.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIsqlalchemy>= 2.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIscikit-learn== 1.9.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpydantic> 2.0.0, < 3.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIclick< 9.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIlxml> 4.0.0, < 7.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIduckdb>= 1.2.0, < 2.0.0pyproject.toml
All dependencies 17

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 12 direct and 5 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIclickdirect
PyPIduckdbdirect
PyPIfingerprintsdirect
PyPIfollowthemoneydirect
PyPIlxmldirect
PyPIpydanticdirect
PyPIrichdirect
PyPIrigourdirect
PyPIscikit-learn1.9.0direct
PyPIshortuuiddirect
PyPIsqlalchemydirect
PyPItextualdirect
PyPIcoverageindirect
PyPIflake8indirect
PyPIplyvelindirect
PyPIredisindirect
PyPIwheelindirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 1 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 16 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

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 v0.31.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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