Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-22 22:54 UTC

simd-lite / simd-json

Rust port of simdjson

RustApache-2.0★ 1,419 stars⑂ 107 forkssince Mar 2019View on GitHub ↗

simd-lite/simd-json holds a health index of 86 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (80/100) and lowest on Sustainability & Governance (66/100). It was last updated 6 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

86
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.

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

Ownership

simd-liteOrganization
17 followers7 public repossince Aug 2019

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
crates.iosimd-json0.18.01,824,1521186 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

72Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 6 days ago
5.5/36Commit cadence8/52 weeks with commits
14.1/18Commit volume36 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained27 commit(s) and 7 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year36
human_commit_share0.95
days_since_last_push6
active_weeks_last_year8
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases100 version tags (no GitHub releases)
36/36Release recencylatest release 6 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~73.7 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tagv0.18.0
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release6
mean_days_between_releases73.7
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?

77Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
51.1/60Stars1,419 stars
16.9/25Forks107 forks
6.5/15Watchers16 watchers
Inputs used
forks107
stars1,419
watchers16
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (Apache-2.0)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code 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_conductyes
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads1,824,152 downloads/month across crates
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagessimd-json
dependents
ecosystemscrates
total_downloads18,975,720
monthly_downloads1,824,152
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?

66Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
5.5/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 76% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth62 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 16 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled62
top_contributor_share0.757
How it's scored
38.4/42Issue resolution91% of issues closed
27.4/30PR acceptance262/287 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
3/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 8/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
merged_prs262
open_issues15
closed_issues159
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d1
prs_decided_30d1
issue_closed_ratio0.914
closed_unmerged_prs25
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 domain
9/25Owner reach17 followers of simd-lite
18.6/25Track record7 public repos, account ~6 yr old
Inputs used
followers17
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginsimd-lite
public_repos7
account_age_days2,550

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on crates
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 6 days ago
20/20Version history118 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagessimd-json
ecosystemscrates
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish6

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

80Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows5 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter configCargo.toml ([lints])
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests16 out of 16 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://docs.rs/simd-json
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics5 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsrust, json, simd, rust-crate, hacktoberfest
has_wikiyes
homepage
docs_sitehttps://docs.rs/simd-json
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

68Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
2.5/2.5CI-Tests16 out of 16 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
1.5/7.5Code-ReviewFound 8/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 16 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
5/5Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained27 commit(s) and 7 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate6.4
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
17.3/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories3 affected: remove_dir_all 0.5.3 (low), mmap 0.1.1 (unknown), tempdir 0.3.7 (unknown)
34/40No advisories left outstanding3 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 3,112 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories4
affected_packages3
assessed_packages111
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitylow 1, unknown 2
direct_affected_packages0
Matched the crates:simd-json@0.18.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 111 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.

68Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
21.3/40Legible commit history38 of 95 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.4
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapMakefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format configCargo.toml ([lints])
11/11Static type checkingRust (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environmentdevcontainer, Dockerfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance5 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_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontaineryes
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsCargo.toml, fuzz/Cargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0.05
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeRust (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/83 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes52,293
source_files_sampled83
oversized_source_files0
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP servernot applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examplesexamples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalno
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

1,419GitHub stars
62contributors
36commits, last 12 months
6days since last push
100releases
1bus factor
15open issues
crates.iopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 107 ⇿
0Stars
107Forks
100Releases

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.

02040608010012010562019-042022-122026-08
Major 0Minor 17Patch 80

Each point covers 7 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.4 / 10
6.4aggregate

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 · 2026-08-22 22:54 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-Tests16 out of 16 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2Code-ReviewFound 8/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
10Contributorsproject has 16 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
10Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained27 commit(s) and 7 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 11
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
crates.iosimdutf80.1.4Cargo.toml
crates.iovalue-trait0.12Cargo.toml
crates.iobeef0.5Cargo.toml
crates.iohalfbrown0.4Cargo.toml
crates.ioahash0.8Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde1Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde_json1Cargo.toml
crates.ioalloc_counter0.0.4Cargo.toml
crates.iocolored3.0Cargo.toml
crates.iogetopts0.2Cargo.toml
crates.iojemallocator0.5Cargo.toml
All dependencies 18

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 11 direct and 7 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
crates.ioahashdirect
crates.ioalloc_counterdirect
crates.iobeefdirect
crates.iocoloreddirect
crates.iogetoptsdirect
crates.iohalfbrowndirect
crates.iojemallocatordirect
crates.ioserdedirect
crates.ioserde_jsondirect
crates.iosimdutf8direct
crates.iovalue-traitdirect
crates.iocore_affinityindirect
crates.iocriterionindirect
crates.iofloat-cmpindirect
crates.iolibfuzzer-sysindirect
crates.ioperfcntindirect
crates.ioproptestindirect
crates.ioref-castindirect
Dependency advisories 3

Installing crates:simd-json@0.18.0 pulls in 111 packages, direct and transitive: 3 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct dependencies.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
remove_dir_all0.5.3indirectlow20.8.0
mmap0.1.1indirectunknown1
tempdir0.3.7indirectunknown1

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 statisticscrates.io.