Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-16 09:42 UTC

pydantic / pydantic-settings

Settings management using pydantic

PythonMIT★ 1,457 stars⑂ 192 forkssince Sep 2022View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryDesktop applicationCommand-line toolhow this is determined
#pydantic#configuration#environment#python#settings

pydantic/pydantic-settings holds a health index of 98 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Vitality (96/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (72/100). It was last updated 1 day ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

98
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.

98
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 86 is calibrated to 98 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

PydanticOrganization · verified domain
3,035 followers86 public repossince Aug 2022

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
PyPIpydantic-settings2.15.0388,022,2914540 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

96Exceptional · 21% of overall

Development activity

98Exceptional
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 1 days ago
33.9/36Commit cadence — 49/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 163 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year163
human_commit_share0.69
days_since_last_push1
active_weeks_last_year49

Release discipline

92Excellent
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 38 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 40 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~45.8 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count38
latest_release_tagv2.15.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release40
mean_days_between_releases45.8
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?

72Good · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

75Good
How it's scored
51.3/60Stars — 1,457 stars
19/25Forks — 192 forks
5/15Watchers — 9 watchers
Inputs used
forks192
stars1,457
watchers9
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

50Moderate
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_badges5
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicescodecov.io, github.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

100Exceptional
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads — 388,022,291 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagespydantic-settings
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads388,022,291
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?

85Excellent · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

62Moderate
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
12.9/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 42% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 99 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 23 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled99
top_contributor_share0.425

Issue & PR responsiveness

89Excellent
How it's scored
39.5/42Issue resolution — 94% of issues closed
26.4/30PR acceptance — 420/478 decided PRs merged
9.3/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 10/14 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
13.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 22/23 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
merged_prs420
open_issues28
closed_issues449
prs_merged_7d4
prs_decided_7d6
prs_merged_30d18
prs_decided_30d22
issue_closed_ratio0.941
closed_unmerged_prs58
first_time_authors_30d11
first_time_prs_merged_30d10
first_time_prs_decided_30d14

Ownership & stewardship

96Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20Verified domain
25/25Owner reach — 3,035 followers of pydantic
21.2/25Track record — 86 public repos, account ~4 yr old
Inputs used
followers3,035
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginpydantic
public_repos86
account_age_days1,500

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 40 days ago
20/20Version history — 45 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagespydantic-settings
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish40

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

92Excellent · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

94Exceptional
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 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 site — https://pydantic.dev/docs/validation/latest/concepts/pydantic_settings/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 5 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicspydantic, configuration, environment, python, settings
has_wikino
homepagehttps://pydantic.dev/docs/validation/latest/concepts/pydantic_settings/
docs_sitehttps://pydantic.dev/docs/validation/latest/concepts/pydantic_settings/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

81Excellent · 16% of overall

Security posture

76Good
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 — 30 out of 30 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
6.8/7.5Code-Review — Found 22/23 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 23 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 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
4/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 8
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
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
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 22 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate7.6
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, 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
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — no indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages6
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched the pypi:pydantic-settings@2.15.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 6 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.

79Good · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

55Moderate
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://pydantic.dev/llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 63 of 69 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://pydantic.dev/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.913
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

98Exceptional
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
11/11Static type checking — pydantic_settings/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 49 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance — 31 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
8/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configspydantic_settings/py.typed
agent_commit_share0.49
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.31

Code legibility for models

78Good
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (pydantic_settings/py.typed)
50.5/55Manageable file sizes — 3/37 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes144,013
source_files_sampled37
oversized_source_files3

Key facts

1,457GitHub stars
99contributors
163commits, last 12 months
1days since last push
38releases
2bus factor
28open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • First-time contributor figures cover 12 of 15 authors (cap 12)

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 192 ⇿
0Stars
192Forks
38Releases

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.

0408012016020019252022-092024-092026-09
Major 1Minor 15Patch 18

Each point covers 4 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 7.6 / 10
7.6aggregate

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 · 2026-09-16 09:41 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-Tests30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
9Code-ReviewFound 22/23 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
10Contributorsproject has 23 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 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
8Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 8
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
0Vulnerabilities22 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 4
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIpydantic>=2.7.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpython-dotenv>=1.2.2pyproject.toml
PyPItyping-extensions>=4.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPItyping-inspection>=0.4.0pyproject.toml
All dependencies 88

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 4 direct and 84 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIpydantic2.13.5direct
PyPIpython-dotenv1.2.3direct
PyPItyping-extensions4.16.0direct
PyPItyping-inspection0.4.4direct
PyPIannotated-types0.7.0indirect
PyPIast-serialize0.6.0indirect
PyPIazure-core1.38.2indirect
PyPIazure-identity1.25.3indirect
PyPIazure-keyvault-secrets4.11.2indirect
PyPIblack26.5.1indirect
PyPIboto31.43.88indirect
PyPIbotocore1.43.92indirect
PyPIbotocore-stubs1.42.41indirect
PyPIcertifi2026.2.25indirect
PyPIcffi2.0.0indirect
PyPIcfgv3.5.0indirect
PyPIchardet5.2.0indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.4.4indirect
PyPIclick8.3.1indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcoverage7.13.4indirect
PyPIcryptography46.0.5indirect
PyPIdiff-cover10.5.1indirect
PyPIdistlib0.4.0indirect
PyPIexceptiongroup1.3.1indirect
PyPIfilelock3.25.0indirect
PyPIgoogle-api-core2.30.0indirect
PyPIgoogle-auth2.48.0indirect
PyPIgoogle-cloud-secret-manager2.30.0indirect
PyPIgoogleapis-common-protos1.72.0indirect
PyPIgrpc-google-iam-v10.14.3indirect
PyPIgrpcio1.78.0indirect
PyPIgrpcio-status1.78.0indirect
PyPIidentify2.6.17indirect
PyPIidna3.11indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPIisodate0.7.2indirect
PyPIjinja23.1.6indirect
PyPIjmespath1.1.0indirect
PyPIlibrt0.13.0indirect
PyPImarkdown-it-py4.0.0indirect
PyPImarkupsafe3.0.3indirect
PyPImdurl0.1.2indirect
PyPImoto5.1.21indirect
PyPImsal1.35.1indirect
PyPImsal-extensions1.3.1indirect
PyPImypy2.3.1indirect
PyPImypy-extensions1.1.0indirect
PyPInodeenv1.10.0indirect
PyPIpackaging26.0indirect
PyPIpathspec1.0.4indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.9.2indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIpre-commit4.6.2indirect
PyPIproto-plus1.27.1indirect
PyPIprotobuf6.33.5indirect
PyPIpyasn10.6.2indirect
PyPIpyasn1-modules0.4.2indirect
PyPIpycparser3.0indirect
PyPIpydantic-core2.46.5indirect
PyPIpygments2.19.2indirect
PyPIpyjwt2.11.0indirect
PyPIpytest9.1.1indirect
PyPIpytest-examples0.0.18indirect
PyPIpytest-mock3.15.1indirect
PyPIpytest-pretty1.3.0indirect
PyPIpython-dateutil2.9.0.post0indirect
PyPIpython-discovery1.1.0indirect
PyPIpytokens0.4.1indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3indirect
PyPIrequests2.32.5indirect
PyPIresponses0.26.0indirect
PyPIrich14.3.3indirect
PyPIrsa4.9.1indirect
PyPIruff0.16.6indirect
PyPIs3transfer0.19.0indirect
PyPIsix1.17.0indirect
PyPItomli2.4.1indirect
PyPItypes-awscrt0.31.2indirect
PyPItypes-boto31.42.78indirect
PyPItypes-boto3-secretsmanager1.42.8indirect
PyPItypes-boto3-ssm1.42.54indirect
PyPItypes-pyyaml6.0.12.20260815indirect
PyPItypes-s3transfer0.16.0indirect
PyPIurllib32.6.3indirect
PyPIvirtualenv21.1.0indirect
PyPIwerkzeug3.1.6indirect
PyPIxmltodict1.0.4indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:pydantic-settings@2.15.0 pulls in 6 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.

The message is kept through sign-in.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with pydantic/pydantic-settings. Read them side by side →

99pydantic/pydantic-aiHow Python does AI. Agents, realtime voice, image generation, embeddings. Every model, every interface, typed end to end.Exceptional99litestar-org/litestarLight, flexible and extensible ASGI framework | Built to scaleExceptional99pydantic/logfireAI observability platform for production LLM and agent systems.Exceptional98langchain-ai/langchainThe agent engineering platform.Exceptional98pydantic/pydanticData validation using Python type hintsExceptional98langchain-ai/langgraphBuild resilient agents.Exceptional

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.