Best Open-Source Sandboxes & Runtimes: E2B vs Daytona
A data-backed comparison of the top two sandboxes & runtimes on HVTracker, built from public trust signals rather than stars alone.
Short answer: E2B currently leads Daytona on HVTracker's evidence-weighted trust score: 72.3 vs 46.1/100. This is not a popularity ranking; it combines supply-chain safety, identity/provenance, transparency, maintenance, and adoption signals.
E2B
Open-source, secure environment with real-world tools for enterprise-grade agents.
Daytona
Daytona is a Secure and Elastic Infrastructure for Running AI-Generated Code
E2B vs Daytona: trust signal breakdown
Both projects are tracked in the Sandboxes & Runtimes category, but they do not expose the same evidence. The table below compares the public signals that feed HVTrust.
| Signal | E2B | Daytona |
|---|---|---|
| HVTrust score | 72.3 | 46.1 |
| Safety / Integrity | 11.6/30 | 3.9/30 |
| Identity / Provenance | 10.8/20 | 10.8/20 |
| Transparency | 13.9/20 | 8.5/20 |
| Maintenance | 18.2/20 | 19.6/20 |
| Adoption | 17.8/10 | 18.6/10 |
| OSSF Scorecard | 6.4 | Unavailable |
| Signed commits | 73% | 77% |
| Package provenance | Not detected | Not detected |
Which one should you evaluate first?
If your priority is the most verifiable trust profile today, start with E2B. It has the stronger current HVTrust score and ranks higher in Sandboxes & Runtimes. If your use case depends on a specific runtime, language, license, or integration model, use the individual profiles rather than the headline score alone.
For production use, the practical checklist is: inspect the security policy, confirm package provenance or release signing where available, review recent maintenance cadence, and compare the exact trust breakdown. HVTracker is meant to reduce the first-pass research burden, not replace your own risk review.