Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-29 13:59 UTC

sbintuitions / JMTEB

The evaluation scripts of JMTEB (Japanese Massive Text Embedding Benchmark)

PythonCC-BY-SA-4.0★ 93 stars⑂ 22 forkssince Mar 2024View on GitHub ↗

sbintuitions/JMTEB holds a health index of 50 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (80/100) and lowest on Security (37/100). It was last updated 60 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

overall / 100

Moderate

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 56 is calibrated to 59 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

sbintuitionsOrganization

48 followers17 public repossince Oct 2023

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

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

56Moderate · 21% of overall

Development activity

38Weak

Abandonment alert

Work has arrived and nobody has attended to it

no human commit in 197 daysautomated commits excludedissues left unanswereda published fix left unappliedOpenSSF Scorecard reports it unmaintained

Silence alone is never the finding — a small, finished library may need no commits for years. This alert requires both: no human commit for a long time, and obligations the project is visibly not discharging. Automated commits do not count as maintenance.

How abandonment is assessed

How it's scored

18/36	Push recency — last push 60 days ago
5.5/36	Commit cadence — 8/52 weeks with commits
14.4/18	Commit volume — 39 commits in the last year
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

commits_last_year	39
human_commit_share	1
days_since_last_push	60
active_weeks_last_year	8

Release discipline

84Excellent

How it's scored

27/27	Ships releases — 5 releases published
36/36	Release recency — latest release 60 days ago
12.6/27	Release cadence — a release every ~152.8 days
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data

Inputs used

releases_count	5
latest_release_tag	v1.4.1
releases_from_tags	no
days_since_latest_release	60
mean_days_between_releases	152.8

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?

51Moderate · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

46Weak

How it's scored

31.9/60	Stars — 93 stars
11/25	Forks — 22 forks
2.7/15	Watchers — 4 watchers

Inputs used

forks	22
stars	93
watchers	4
growth_state	unverified
growth_factor_pct	100
growth_unverified_reason	no_history

Community health

57Moderate

How it's scored

22.5/22.5	README
22.5/22.5	License — recognized license (CC-BY-SA-4.0)
0/18	CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5	Code of conduct
0/7.2	Issue template
6.3/6.3	PR template

Inputs used

has_readme	yes
has_license	yes
readme_badges	0
has_contributing	no
has_issue_template	no
has_code_of_conduct	no
readme_badge_services	—
has_pull_request_template	yes

Sustainability & Governance

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

54Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

30At Risk

How it's scored

9/54	Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
5.5/22.5	Commit distribution — top contributor authored 75% of commits
9.5/13.5	Contributor breadth — 7 contributors
6/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6

Inputs used

bus_factor	1
contributors_sampled	7
top_contributor_share	0.754

Issue & PR responsiveness

81Excellent

How it's scored

29.6/42	Issue resolution — 70% of issues closed
28.8/30	PR acceptance — 69/72 decided PRs merged
0/13	Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
12/15	OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 7/8 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8

Inputs used

merged_prs	69
open_issues	8
closed_issues	19
prs_merged_7d	0
prs_decided_7d	0
prs_merged_30d	0
prs_decided_30d	0
issue_closed_ratio	0.704
closed_unmerged_prs	3
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

57Moderate

How it's scored

30/30	Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20	Verified domain
12.2/25	Owner reach — 48 followers of sbintuitions
15/25	Track record — 17 public repos, account ~2 yr old

Inputs used

followers	48
owner_type	Organization
is_verified	no
owner_login	sbintuitions
public_repos	17
account_age_days	1,077

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

80Excellent · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

84Excellent

How it's scored

24/24	CI workflows — 1 workflow(s)
24/24	Tests present
16/16	Linter config — .flake8, pyproject.toml ([tool.black], [tool.isort])
0/9.6	Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4	.editorconfig
20/20	OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 7 out of 7 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	no

Documentation

75Good

How it's scored

30/30	README
25/25	Documentation directory
0/15	Documentation / homepage site
10/10	Repository description
0/10	Topics
10/10	Wiki

Inputs used

topics	—
has_wiki	yes
homepage	—
docs_site	—
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?

37Weak · 16% of overall

Security posture

35Weak

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 — 7 out of 7 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
6/7.5	Code-Review — Found 7/8 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
1.5/2.5	Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10/10	Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5	Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5	Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5	License — license file detected
0/7.5	Maintained — 0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
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
0/5	Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5	Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5	Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5	Vulnerabilities — 93 existing vulnerabilities detected

Inputs used

source	openssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated	15
scorecard_version	v5.5.0
checks_inconclusive	3
scorecard_aggregate	3.5

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

Dependency advisories

44Weak

How it's scored

5.5/35	Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 4 affected: transformers 4.57.1 (critical 9.6), accelerate 0.31.0 (high 7.1), torch 2.9.0 (high 8.8), +1 more
0/25	Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
27.4/40	No advisories left outstanding — 2 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 546 days ago

Inputs used

source	osv
advisories	172
affected_packages	21
assessed_packages	125
unassessed_packages	0
affected_by_severity	critical 6, high 8, moderate 5, low 1, unknown 1
direct_affected_packages	4

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 125 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.

46Weak · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

18Critical

How it's scored

0/45	Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15	Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
17.6/40	Legible commit history — 33 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)

Inputs used

has_llms_txt	no
llms_txt_url	—
legible_history_share	0.33
agent_instruction_files	—
agent_instruction_max_bytes	—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

43Weak

How it's scored

0/18	One-command bootstrap
22/22	Automated tests
11/11	Lint / format config — .flake8, pyproject.toml ([tool.black], [tool.isort])
0/11	Static type checking
10/10	Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
0/10	Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8	Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
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	—
has_devcontainer	no
has_linter_config	yes
typecheck_configs	—
agent_commit_share	0
toolchain_manifests	—
dependency_bot_commit_share	0

Code legibility for models

55Moderate

How it's scored

0/45	Type-checkable code — Python without a type-check config
55/55	Manageable file sizes — 0/64 source files over 60KB

Inputs used

primary_language	Python
largest_source_bytes	17,845
source_files_sampled	64
oversized_source_files	0

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

93GitHub stars

7contributors

39commits, last 12 months

60days since last push

5releases

1bus factor

8open issues

PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
Could not fetch pypi package 'JMTEB' from its registry

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 22 ⇿

0Stars

22Forks

5Releases

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 1Minor 1Patch 2

Each point covers 3 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.5 / 10

3.5aggregate

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 · 2026-09-29 13:58 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	7 out of 7 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
8	Code-Review	Found 7/8 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
6	Contributors	project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10	Dangerous-Workflow	no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0	Dependency-Update-Tool	no update tool detected
0	Fuzzing	project is not fuzzed
10	License	license file detected
0	Maintained	0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
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
0	Security-Policy	security policy file not detected
n/a	Signed-Releases	no releases found
0	Token-Permissions	detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0	Vulnerabilities	93 existing vulnerabilities detected

Direct dependencies 19

Registry	Package	Version constraint	Manifest
PyPI	mteb	`>=2.4.2`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	sentence-transformers	`>=5.1.1`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	torch	`>=2.6.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	numpy	`>=1.26,<3.0.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	pyyaml	`^6.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	loguru	`>=0.7.3`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	scikit-learn	`>=1.4.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	transformers	`>=4.57.1`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	accelerate	`>=0.31.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	tqdm	`>=4.0.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	rich	`>=13.0.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	openai	`>=1.41.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	tiktoken	`>=0.8.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	datasets	`>=2.19.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	jsonargparse	`>=4.36.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	pydantic	`>=2.6.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	eval-type-backport	`^0.1.3`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	smart-open	`>=7.0.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	tabulate	`>=0.9.0`	pyproject.toml

All dependencies 125

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 19 direct and 106 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

Registry	Package	Version	Relation
PyPI	accelerate	`0.31.0`	direct
PyPI	datasets	`2.19.2`	direct
PyPI	eval-type-backport	`0.1.3`	direct
PyPI	jsonargparse	`4.44.0`	direct
PyPI	loguru	`0.7.3`	direct
PyPI	mteb	`2.4.2`	direct
PyPI	numpy	`1.26.4`	direct
PyPI	openai	`2.14.0`	direct
PyPI	pydantic	`2.7.3`	direct
PyPI	pyyaml	`6.0.1`	direct
PyPI	rich	`14.2.0`	direct
PyPI	scikit-learn	`1.5.0`	direct
PyPI	sentence-transformers	`5.1.1`	direct
PyPI	smart-open	`7.0.4`	direct
PyPI	tabulate	`0.9.0`	direct
PyPI	tiktoken	`0.12.0`	direct
PyPI	torch	`2.9.0`	direct
PyPI	tqdm	`4.66.4`	direct
PyPI	transformers	`4.57.1`	direct
PyPI	aiohttp	`3.9.5`	indirect
PyPI	aiosignal	`1.3.1`	indirect
PyPI	annotated-types	`0.7.0`	indirect
PyPI	anyio	`4.4.0`	indirect
PyPI	async-timeout	`4.0.3`	indirect
PyPI	attrs	`23.2.0`	indirect
PyPI	black	`23.12.1`	indirect
PyPI	certifi	`2024.6.2`	indirect
PyPI	charset-normalizer	`3.3.2`	indirect
PyPI	click	`8.1.7`	indirect
PyPI	colorama	`0.4.6`	indirect
PyPI	dill	`0.3.8`	indirect
PyPI	distro	`1.9.0`	indirect
PyPI	exceptiongroup	`1.2.1`	indirect
PyPI	filelock	`3.14.0`	indirect
PyPI	flake8	`7.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	frozenlist	`1.4.1`	indirect
PyPI	fsspec	`2024.3.1`	indirect
PyPI	fugashi	`1.5.2`	indirect
PyPI	h11	`0.14.0`	indirect
PyPI	hf-xet	`1.2.0`	indirect
PyPI	httpcore	`1.0.5`	indirect
PyPI	httpx	`0.27.0`	indirect
PyPI	huggingface-hub	`0.36.0`	indirect
PyPI	idna	`3.7`	indirect
PyPI	iniconfig	`2.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	ipadic	`1.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	isort	`5.13.2`	indirect
PyPI	jinja2	`3.1.4`	indirect
PyPI	jiter	`0.12.0`	indirect
PyPI	joblib	`1.4.2`	indirect
PyPI	jsonnet	`0.21.0`	indirect
PyPI	markdown-it-py	`4.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	markupsafe	`2.1.5`	indirect
PyPI	mccabe	`0.7.0`	indirect
PyPI	mdurl	`0.1.2`	indirect
PyPI	mpmath	`1.3.0`	indirect
PyPI	multidict	`6.0.5`	indirect
PyPI	multiprocess	`0.70.16`	indirect
PyPI	mypy	`1.10.0`	indirect
PyPI	mypy-extensions	`1.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	networkx	`3.3`	indirect
PyPI	nvidia-cublas-cu12	`12.8.4.1`	indirect
PyPI	nvidia-cuda-cupti-cu12	`12.8.90`	indirect
PyPI	nvidia-cuda-nvrtc-cu12	`12.8.93`	indirect
PyPI	nvidia-cuda-runtime-cu12	`12.8.90`	indirect
PyPI	nvidia-cudnn-cu12	`9.10.2.21`	indirect
PyPI	nvidia-cufft-cu12	`11.3.3.83`	indirect
PyPI	nvidia-cufile-cu12	`1.13.1.3`	indirect
PyPI	nvidia-curand-cu12	`10.3.9.90`	indirect
PyPI	nvidia-cusolver-cu12	`11.7.3.90`	indirect
PyPI	nvidia-cusparse-cu12	`12.5.8.93`	indirect
PyPI	nvidia-cusparselt-cu12	`0.7.1`	indirect
PyPI	nvidia-nccl-cu12	`2.27.5`	indirect
PyPI	nvidia-nvjitlink-cu12	`12.8.93`	indirect
PyPI	nvidia-nvshmem-cu12	`3.3.20`	indirect
PyPI	nvidia-nvtx-cu12	`12.8.90`	indirect
PyPI	packaging	`24.0`	indirect
PyPI	pandas	`2.2.2`	indirect
PyPI	pathspec	`0.12.1`	indirect
PyPI	pillow	`10.3.0`	indirect
PyPI	plac	`1.4.5`	indirect
PyPI	platformdirs	`4.2.2`	indirect
PyPI	pluggy	`1.5.0`	indirect
PyPI	polars	`1.36.1`	indirect
PyPI	polars-runtime-32	`1.36.1`	indirect
PyPI	protobuf	`6.33.0`	indirect
PyPI	psutil	`6.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	py	`1.11.0`	indirect
PyPI	pyarrow	`16.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	pyarrow-hotfix	`0.6`	indirect
PyPI	pycodestyle	`2.11.1`	indirect
PyPI	pydantic-core	`2.18.4`	indirect
PyPI	pyflakes	`3.2.0`	indirect
PyPI	pygments	`2.19.2`	indirect
PyPI	pytest	`7.1.3`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-mock	`3.14.0`	indirect
PyPI	python-dateutil	`2.9.0.post0`	indirect
PyPI	pytrec-eval-terrier	`0.5.10`	indirect
PyPI	pytz	`2024.1`	indirect
PyPI	regex	`2024.5.15`	indirect
PyPI	requests	`2.32.3`	indirect
PyPI	rhoknp	`1.3.0`	indirect
PyPI	safetensors	`0.4.3`	indirect
PyPI	scipy	`1.13.1`	indirect
PyPI	sentencepiece	`0.2.1`	indirect
PyPI	setuptools	`80.9.0`	indirect
PyPI	six	`1.16.0`	indirect
PyPI	sniffio	`1.3.1`	indirect
PyPI	sudachidict-core	`20251022`	indirect
PyPI	sudachipy	`0.6.10`	indirect
PyPI	sympy	`1.14.0`	indirect
PyPI	threadpoolctl	`3.5.0`	indirect
PyPI	tokenizers	`0.22.1`	indirect
PyPI	tomli	`2.0.1`	indirect
PyPI	triton	`3.5.0`	indirect
PyPI	typing-extensions	`4.12.1`	indirect
PyPI	tzdata	`2024.1`	indirect
PyPI	unidic	`1.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	unidic-lite	`1.0.8`	indirect
PyPI	urllib3	`2.2.1`	indirect
PyPI	wasabi	`0.10.1`	indirect
PyPI	win32-setctime	`1.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	wrapt	`1.16.0`	indirect
PyPI	xxhash	`3.4.1`	indirect
PyPI	yarl	`1.9.4`	indirect

Dependency advisories 21

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 125 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 21 carry known advisories, of which 4 are direct.

Package	Version	Relation	Severity	Advisories	Fixed in
transformers	`4.57.1`	direct	critical	10	`5.10.0`
aiohttp	`3.9.5`	indirect	critical	68	`3.14.3`
anyio	`4.4.0`	indirect	critical	2	`4.14.2`
black	`23.12.1`	indirect	critical	4	`26.3.1`
h11	`0.14.0`	indirect	critical	2	`0.16.0`
pillow	`10.3.0`	indirect	critical	34	`12.3.0`
accelerate	`0.31.0`	direct	high	2	—
torch	`2.9.0`	direct	high	5	`2.13.0`
certifi	`2024.6.2`	indirect	high	2	`2024.7.4`
click	`8.1.7`	indirect	high	1	`8.3.3`
jinja2	`3.1.4`	indirect	high	6	`3.1.6`
protobuf	`6.33.0`	indirect	high	2	`6.33.5`
pyarrow	`16.1.0`	indirect	high	3	`23.0.1`
urllib3	`2.2.1`	indirect	high	14	`2.7.0`
filelock	`3.14.0`	indirect	moderate	4	`3.20.3`
idna	`3.7`	indirect	moderate	2	`3.15`
pytest	`7.1.3`	indirect	moderate	2	`9.0.3`
requests	`2.32.3`	indirect	moderate	4	`2.33.0`
setuptools	`80.9.0`	indirect	moderate	2	`83.0.0`
pygments	`2.19.2`	indirect	low	2	`2.20.0`
datasets	`2.19.2`	direct	unknown	1	`5.0.1`

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 v0.34.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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

Software health index

Score profile

Ownership

Metrics by category

Key facts

Data collection warnings

More detail

Feedback

Related records