RegistryCompare › Apify MCP Server vs Safari MCP

Apify MCP Server vs Safari MCP

An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of Apify MCP Server and Safari MCP, two MCP Servers projects in the HVTracker registry. Scores come from public, checkable signals — supply-chain provenance, OSSF Scorecard, maintenance, and adoption — not popularity.

Apify MCP Server leads on trust — 88.8/100 (Grade A) vs 86.0/100 (Grade A), a 2.8-point gap. Full breakdown below.
Signal Apify MCP Serverapify/apify-mcp-server Safari MCPachiya-automation/safari-mcp
HVTrust score 88.8 86.0
Evidence grade A A
Coverage grade B B
Overall rank #21 #48
Rank in MCP Servers #3 #7
GitHub stars 5.1k 177
Last updated today today
Build provenance Yes Yes
OSSF Scorecard 5.5 / 10 6.1 / 10
License MIT MIT
Downloads 60k/wk 2k/wk
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25 19.4 19.1
Identity & provenance / 18 18.0 18.0
Transparency / 17 13.2 13.7
Maintenance / 20 19.6 19.4
Adoption / 20 15.3 9.8
Runtime capability surface (full matrix)
MCP server Implemented Implemented
External providers
Requires API keys Yes No
Plugin surface
Provenance drift Match Match
Open in the live compare tool → Apify MCP Server profile Safari MCP profile More MCP Servers →

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 →