ASM vs Engram
An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of ASM and Engram, two Needs review projects in the HVTracker registry. Scores come from public, checkable signals — supply-chain provenance, OSSF Scorecard, maintenance, and adoption — not popularity.
ASM leads on trust — 60.2/100 (Grade C) vs 59.5/100 (Grade C), a 0.7-point gap. Full breakdown below.
| Signal | ASMluongnv89/asm | EngramGentleman-Programming/engram |
|---|---|---|
| HVTrust score | 60.2 | 59.5 |
| Evidence grade | C | C |
| Coverage grade | C | C |
| Overall rank | #332 | #344 |
| Rank in Needs review | #4 | #5 |
| GitHub stars | 872 | 6.1k |
| Last updated | 1d ago | 2d ago |
| Build provenance | No | No |
| OSSF Scorecard | 6.2 / 10 | 5.0 / 10 |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Downloads | — | — |
| Trust dimensions (points earned) | ||
| Safety / integrity / 25 | 10.9 | 9.7 |
| Identity & provenance / 18 | 10.8 | 10.8 |
| Transparency / 17 | 13.8 | 12.8 |
| Maintenance / 20 | 17.6 | 16.4 |
| Adoption / 20 | 7.1 | 9.1 |
| Runtime capability surface (full matrix) | ||
| MCP server | — | Implemented |
| External providers | — | 1 — Anthropic |
| Requires API keys | No | Yes |
| Plugin surface | — | plugins |
| Provenance drift | — | — |
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 →