Registry › Compare › ASM vs Obsidian Second Brain

ASM vs Obsidian Second Brain

Both are Grade C and 0.8 points apart, so choose on what you weigh most. ASM leads on supply-chain integrity; Obsidian Second Brain leads on adoption and maintenance.

C ASM 64.2

The universal skill manager for AI coding agents.

luongnv89/asm · #505 overall · #3 Needs review · coverage C (2/5)

Choose ASM if supply-chain integrity matters most.

+1.2Safety / Integrity: 86% of recent commits signed, against 68%

C Obsidian Second Brain 63.4

Persistent memory for Claude Code and 6 other CLI agents, stored as plain markdown in your Obsidian vault. Stop re-explaining your projects, decisions and people every session. 45 commands: hybrid semantic search, self-rewriting notes, key-less web research, and scheduled agents that maintain the…

eugeniughelbur/obsidian-second-brain · #529 overall · #4 Needs review · coverage C (2/5)

Choose Obsidian Second Brain if adoption and maintenance matter most.

+1.7Adoption: 4.6k GitHub stars against 945
+0.7Maintenance: last push 1d ago, against 3d ago

Where they differ

12.8

Safety / IntegrityASM +1.2

11.6

14.3

TransparencyASM +0.2

14.1

19.2

MaintenanceObsidian Second Brain +0.7

19.9

7.1

AdoptionObsidian Second Brain +1.7

8.8

+0.0

Runtime calibrationASM +1.8

-1.8

1 dimension identical: Identity 10.8 · Full evidence table

An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of ASM and Obsidian Second Brain, two Needs review projects in the HVTracker registry. Scores come from public, checkable signals — supply-chain provenance, OSSF Scorecard, maintenance, and adoption — not popularity.

Full evidence

Signal	ASMluongnv89/asm	Obsidian Second Braineugeniughelbur/obsidian-second-brain
HVTrust score	64.2	63.4
Evidence grade	C	C
Coverage grade	C	C
Overall rank	#505	#529
Rank in Needs review	#3	#4
GitHub stars	945	4.6k
Last updated	3d ago	1d ago
Build provenance	No	No
OSSF Scorecard	6.8 / 10	6.6 / 10
License	MIT	MIT
Downloads	—	—
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25	12.8	11.6
Identity & provenance / 18	10.8	10.8
Transparency / 17	14.3	14.1
Maintenance / 20	19.2	19.9
Adoption / 20	7.1	8.8
Runtime capability surface (full matrix)
MCP server	—	Implemented
External providers	—	6 — Anthropic, Google Gemini, OpenAI, …
Requires API keys	No	Yes
Plugin surface	—	plugins
Provenance drift	—	—

Open in the live compare tool → ASM profile Obsidian Second Brain profile More Needs review →

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 →