A2A / Agent2Agent Protocol vs mcp-proxy
An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of A2A / Agent2Agent Protocol and mcp-proxy, two Protocols & Tool Integration projects in the HVTracker registry. Scores come from public, checkable signals — supply-chain provenance, OSSF Scorecard, maintenance, and adoption — not popularity.
A2A / Agent2Agent Protocol leads on trust — 89.1/100 (Grade A) vs 79.9/100 (Grade B), a 9.2-point gap. Full breakdown below.
| Signal | A2A / Agent2Agent Protocolgoogle/A2A | mcp-proxysparfenyuk/mcp-proxy |
|---|---|---|
| HVTrust score | 89.1 | 79.9 |
| Evidence grade | A | B |
| Coverage grade | A | B |
| Overall rank | #18 | #67 |
| Rank in Protocols & Tool Integration | #2 | #5 |
| GitHub stars | 25.2k | 2.7k |
| Last updated | today | 19d ago |
| Build provenance | Yes | Yes |
| OSSF Scorecard | 7.0 / 10 | 5.7 / 10 |
| License | Apache-2.0 | MIT |
| Downloads | 2.6M/wk | 449k/wk |
| Trust dimensions (points earned) | ||
| Safety / integrity / 25 | 21.2 | 17.1 |
| Identity & provenance / 18 | 18.0 | 18.0 |
| Transparency / 17 | 14.4 | 13.3 |
| Maintenance / 20 | 17.0 | 10.7 |
| Adoption / 20 | 19.1 | 15.8 |
| Runtime capability surface (full matrix) | ||
| MCP server | — | Implemented |
| External providers | — | — |
| Requires API keys | No | Yes |
| Plugin surface | extensions | — |
| Provenance drift | Unknown | Match |
Open in the live compare tool →
A2A / Agent2Agent Protocol profile
mcp-proxy profile
More Protocols & Tool Integration →
How to read this: HVTrust (0–100) weighs supply-chain signals (provenance, OSSF Scorecard, signed commits, open license) alongside real-world adoption, scaled by an evidence-confidence factor. Grade bands: A ≥ 80, B ≥ 65, C ≥ 50, D < 50. Signals refresh daily. Full methodology v4.3 →