Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-13 02:40 UTC

ormar-orm / ormar

python async orm with fastapi in mind and pydantic validation

PythonMIT★ 1,804 stars⑂ 97 forkssince Aug 2020View on GitHub ↗

#orm #sqlalchemy #async-orm #python-orm #fastapi #pydantic #alembic #databases

ormar-orm/ormar holds a health index of 90 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (96/100) and lowest on Sustainability & Governance (59/100). It was last updated 1 day ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

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.

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)

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 76 is calibrated to 90 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

ormar-ormOrganization

0 followers3 public repossince Feb 2026

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

Package ecosystems

Registry	Package	Version	Downloads / mo	Versions	Last publish	Tags
PyPI	ormar	0.26.0	-	94	65 days ago	orm sqlalchemy fastapi pydantic databases async alembic

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

88Excellent · 21% of overall

Development activity

86Excellent

How it's scored

36/36	Push recency — last push 1 days ago
22.2/36	Commit cadence — 32/52 weeks with commits
18/18	Commit volume — 277 commits in the last year
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 5 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

commits_last_year	277
human_commit_share	0.22
days_since_last_push	1
active_weeks_last_year	32

Release discipline

92Excellent

How it's scored

27/27	Ships releases — 87 releases published
36/36	Release recency — latest release 65 days ago
19.8/27	Release cadence — a release every ~90.4 days
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data

Inputs used

releases_count	87
latest_release_tag	0.26.0
releases_from_tags	no
days_since_latest_release	65
mean_days_between_releases	90.4

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?

73Good · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

76Good

How it's scored

52.8/60	Stars — 1,804 stars
16.5/25	Forks — 97 forks
6.4/15	Watchers — 15 watchers

Inputs used

forks	97
stars	1,804
watchers	15
growth_state	unverified
growth_factor_pct	100
growth_unverified_reason	no_history

Community health

70Good

How it's scored

22.5/22.5	README
22.5/22.5	License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18	CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5	Code of conduct
0/7.2	Issue template
0/6.3	PR template

Inputs used

has_readme	yes
has_license	yes
readme_badges	4
has_contributing	yes
has_issue_template	no
has_code_of_conduct	no
readme_badge_services	codecov.io, github.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_template	no

Sustainability & Governance

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

59Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

35Weak

How it's scored

9/54	Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
2.2/22.5	Commit distribution — top contributor authored 90% of commits
13.5/13.5	Contributor breadth — 47 contributors
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 4 contributing companies or organizations

Inputs used

bus_factor	1
contributors_sampled	47
top_contributor_share	0.904

Issue & PR responsiveness

69Good

How it's scored

37.2/42	Issue resolution — 88% of issues closed
23.1/30	PR acceptance — 939/1,217 decided PRs merged
0/13	Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15	OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/2 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

merged_prs	939
open_issues	32
closed_issues	247
prs_merged_7d	0
prs_decided_7d	0
prs_merged_30d	1
prs_decided_30d	1
issue_closed_ratio	0.885
closed_unmerged_prs	278
first_time_authors_30d	0
first_time_prs_merged_30d	0
first_time_prs_decided_30d	0

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

44Weak

How it's scored

30/30	Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20	Verified domain — verified-domain status not read for this organization
0/25	Owner reach — 0 followers of ormar-orm
5.3/25	Track record — 3 public repos, account ~0 yr old

Inputs used

followers	0
owner_type	Organization
is_verified	—
owner_login	ormar-orm
public_repos	3
account_age_days	166

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional

How it's scored

25/25	Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35	Publish recency — latest publish 65 days ago
20/20	Version history — 94 published versions
20/20	Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked

Inputs used

packages	ormar
ecosystems	pypi
any_deprecated	no
min_days_since_publish	65

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

96Exceptional · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

94Exceptional

How it's scored

24/24	CI workflows — 8 workflow(s)
24/24	Tests present
16/16	Linter config
9.6/9.6	Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4	.editorconfig
20/20	OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

has_ci	yes
has_tests	yes
has_editorconfig	no
has_linter_config	yes
has_precommit_config	yes

Documentation

100Exceptional

How it's scored

30/30	README
25/25	Documentation directory
15/15	Documentation / homepage site — https://collerek.github.io/ormar/
10/10	Repository description
10/10	Topics — 8 topics
10/10	Wiki

Inputs used

topics	orm, sqlalchemy, async-orm, python-orm, fastapi, pydantic, alembic, databases
has_wiki	yes
homepage	https://collerek.github.io/ormar/
docs_site	https://collerek.github.io/ormar/
has_readme	yes
has_docs_dir	yes
has_description	yes

Security

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

63Moderate · 16% of overall

Security posture

54Moderate

How it's scored

7.5/7.5	Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5	Branch-Protection — no data
2.5/2.5	CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5	CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5	Code-Review — Found 0/2 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5	Contributors — project has 4 contributing companies or organizations
10/10	Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5	Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5	Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5	License — license file detected
7.5/7.5	Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 5 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5	Packaging — no data
0/5	Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5	SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
2/5	Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5	Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5	Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
3.8/7.5	Vulnerabilities — 5 existing vulnerabilities detected

Inputs used

source	openssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated	15
scorecard_version	v5.5.0
checks_inconclusive	3
scorecard_aggregate	5.4

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional

How it's scored

35/35	Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
25/25	Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — no indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40	No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date

Inputs used

source	osv
advisories	0
affected_packages	0
assessed_packages	9
unassessed_packages	0
affected_by_severity	none
direct_affected_packages	0

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched the pypi:ormar@0.26.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 9 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.

73Good · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

40Weak

How it's scored

0/45	Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15	Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40	Legible commit history — 20 of 22 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)

Inputs used

has_llms_txt	no
llms_txt_url	—
legible_history_share	0.909
agent_instruction_files	—
agent_instruction_max_bytes	—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

84Excellent

How it's scored

18/18	One-command bootstrap — Makefile
22/22	Automated tests
11/11	Lint / format config
11/11	Static type checking — ormar/py.typed
10/10	Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
4/10	Demonstrated agent practice — 2 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8	Automated maintenance — 78 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

has_nix	no
has_tests	yes
lockfiles	poetry.lock
has_dockerfile	yes
typed_language	no
bootstrap_files	Makefile
has_devcontainer	no
has_linter_config	yes
typecheck_configs	ormar/py.typed
agent_commit_share	0.02
toolchain_manifests	—
dependency_bot_commit_share	0.78

Code legibility for models

82Excellent

How it's scored

27/45	Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (ormar/py.typed)
54.8/55	Manageable file sizes — 1/334 source files over 60KB

Inputs used

primary_language	Python
largest_source_bytes	61,077
source_files_sampled	334
oversized_source_files	1

Machine-readable interfaces

100Exceptional

How it's scored

0/40	API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
0/20	MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40	Runnable examples — examples

Inputs used

example_dirs	examples
has_mcp_signal	no
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

1,804GitHub stars

47contributors

277commits, last 12 months

1days since last push

87releases

1bus factor

32open 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 ★ / 97 ⇿

0Stars

97Forks

78Releases

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.

Major 0Minor 16Patch 62

Each point covers 6 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.4 / 10

5.4aggregate

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 · 2026-08-13 02:40 UTC

10	Binary-Artifacts	no binaries found in the repo
n/a	Branch-Protection	internal 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
10	CI-Tests	30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0	CII-Best-Practices	no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0	Code-Review	Found 0/2 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10	Contributors	project has 4 contributing companies or organizations
10	Dangerous-Workflow	no dangerous workflow patterns detected
10	Dependency-Update-Tool	update tool detected
0	Fuzzing	project is not fuzzed
10	License	license file detected
10	Maintained	30 commit(s) and 5 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/a	Packaging	packaging workflow not detected
0	Pinned-Dependencies	dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0	SAST	SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
4	Security-Policy	security policy file detected
n/a	Signed-Releases	no releases found
0	Token-Permissions	detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
5	Vulnerabilities	5 existing vulnerabilities detected

Direct dependencies 12

Registry	Package	Version constraint	Manifest
PyPI	pydantic	`>=2.11.9,<2.14`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	SQLAlchemy	`^2.0.40`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	cryptography	`>=44.0.1,<50.0.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	aiosqlite	`>=0.19,<0.23`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	aiomysql	`>=0.1.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	aiopg	`^1.3.3`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	asyncpg	`>=0.28,<0.32`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	psycopg2-binary	`^2.9.1`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	mysqlclient	`^2.1.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	PyMySQL	`^1.1.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	ormar-utils	`>=0.2.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	orjson	`>=3.6.4`	pyproject.toml

All dependencies 115

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 12 direct and 103 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

Registry	Package	Version	Relation
PyPI	aiomysql	`0.3.2`	direct
PyPI	aiopg	`1.4.0`	direct
PyPI	aiosqlite	`0.22.1`	direct
PyPI	asyncpg	`0.31.0`	direct
PyPI	cryptography	`49.0.0`	direct
PyPI	mysqlclient	`2.2.8`	direct
PyPI	orjson	`3.11.9`	direct
PyPI	ormar-utils	`0.2.0`	direct
PyPI	psycopg2-binary	`2.9.12`	direct
PyPI	pydantic	`2.12.5`	direct
PyPI	pymysql	`1.2.0`	direct
PyPI	sqlalchemy	`2.0.51`	direct
PyPI	annotated-doc	`0.0.4`	indirect
PyPI	annotated-types	`0.7.0`	indirect
PyPI	anyio	`4.5.2`	indirect
PyPI	asgi-lifespan	`2.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	ast-serialize	`0.6.0`	indirect
PyPI	async-timeout	`4.0.3`	indirect
PyPI	babel	`2.16.0`	indirect
PyPI	backports-asyncio-runner	`1.2.0`	indirect
PyPI	backrefs	`6.1`	indirect
PyPI	certifi	`2024.8.30`	indirect
PyPI	cffi	`2.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	cfgv	`3.4.0`	indirect
PyPI	charset-normalizer	`3.4.0`	indirect
PyPI	click	`8.1.7`	indirect
PyPI	codecov	`2.1.13`	indirect
PyPI	colorama	`0.4.6`	indirect
PyPI	coverage	`7.13.3`	indirect
PyPI	dataclasses	`0.6`	indirect
PyPI	distlib	`0.3.9`	indirect
PyPI	dnspython	`2.6.1`	indirect
PyPI	email-validator	`2.3.0`	indirect
PyPI	exceptiongroup	`1.2.2`	indirect
PyPI	faker	`40.36.0`	indirect
PyPI	fastapi	`0.141.1`	indirect
PyPI	filelock	`3.20.3`	indirect
PyPI	ghp-import	`2.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	greenlet	`3.1.1`	indirect
PyPI	griffe	`1.15.0`	indirect
PyPI	h11	`0.16.0`	indirect
PyPI	httpcore	`1.0.9`	indirect
PyPI	httpx	`0.28.1`	indirect
PyPI	identify	`2.6.1`	indirect
PyPI	idna	`3.15`	indirect
PyPI	iniconfig	`2.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	jinja2	`3.1.6`	indirect
PyPI	librt	`0.13.0`	indirect
PyPI	markdown	`3.8.1`	indirect
PyPI	markdown-it-py	`3.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	markupsafe	`2.1.5`	indirect
PyPI	mdurl	`0.1.2`	indirect
PyPI	mergedeep	`1.3.4`	indirect
PyPI	mike	`2.2.0`	indirect
PyPI	mkdocs	`1.6.1`	indirect
PyPI	mkdocs-autorefs	`1.4.3`	indirect
PyPI	mkdocs-gen-files	`0.6.1`	indirect
PyPI	mkdocs-get-deps	`0.2.0`	indirect
PyPI	mkdocs-literate-nav	`0.6.3`	indirect
PyPI	mkdocs-material	`9.7.7`	indirect
PyPI	mkdocs-material-extensions	`1.3.1`	indirect
PyPI	mkdocs-section-index	`0.3.12`	indirect
PyPI	mkdocstrings	`1.0.6`	indirect
PyPI	mkdocstrings-python	`2.0.1`	indirect
PyPI	mypy	`2.3.0`	indirect
PyPI	mypy-extensions	`1.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	nest-asyncio	`1.6.0`	indirect
PyPI	nodeenv	`1.9.1`	indirect
PyPI	packaging	`24.2`	indirect
PyPI	paginate	`0.5.7`	indirect
PyPI	pathspec	`1.0.4`	indirect
PyPI	platformdirs	`4.3.6`	indirect
PyPI	pluggy	`1.5.0`	indirect
PyPI	pre-commit	`4.6.1`	indirect
PyPI	properdocs	`1.6.7`	indirect
PyPI	py-cpuinfo	`9.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	pycparser	`2.22`	indirect
PyPI	pydantic-core	`2.41.5`	indirect
PyPI	pydantic-extra-types	`2.11.2`	indirect
PyPI	pygments	`2.20.0`	indirect
PyPI	pymdown-extensions	`10.21.3`	indirect
PyPI	pyparsing	`3.1.4`	indirect
PyPI	pytest	`9.1.1`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-asyncio	`1.4.0`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-benchmark	`5.2.3`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-codspeed	`5.0.3`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-cov	`7.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	python-dateutil	`2.9.0.post0`	indirect
PyPI	pyyaml	`6.0.2`	indirect
PyPI	pyyaml-env-tag	`0.1`	indirect
PyPI	requests	`2.33.0`	indirect
PyPI	rich	`14.2.0`	indirect
PyPI	ruff	`0.16.2`	indirect
PyPI	setuptools	`82.0.1`	indirect
PyPI	six	`1.17.0`	indirect
PyPI	sniffio	`1.3.1`	indirect
PyPI	starlette	`1.3.1`	indirect
PyPI	tomli	`2.2.1`	indirect
PyPI	types-aiofiles	`25.1.0.20260518`	indirect
PyPI	types-cryptography	`3.3.23.2`	indirect
PyPI	types-enum34	`1.1.8`	indirect
PyPI	types-ipaddress	`1.0.8`	indirect
PyPI	types-orjson	`3.6.2`	indirect
PyPI	types-pymysql	`1.2.0.20260807`	indirect
PyPI	types-requests	`2.33.0.20260712`	indirect
PyPI	types-toml	`0.10.8.20260518`	indirect
PyPI	types-ujson	`5.10.0.20250822`	indirect
PyPI	typing-extensions	`4.15.0`	indirect
PyPI	typing-inspection	`0.4.2`	indirect
PyPI	tzdata	`2025.3`	indirect
PyPI	urllib3	`2.7.0`	indirect
PyPI	verspec	`0.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	virtualenv	`20.36.1`	indirect
PyPI	watchdog	`6.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	yappi	`1.7.6`	indirect

Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:ormar@0.26.0 pulls in 9 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.

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 statistics — PyPI.

Software health index

Score profile

Ownership

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Key facts

Data collection warnings

More detail

Feedback

Related records