Registry › Compare › Botpress vs Trigger.dev

Botpress vs Trigger.dev

Both are Grade A and 1.3 points apart, so choose on what you weigh most. Botpress leads on supply-chain integrity and rests on broader evidence; Trigger.dev leads on adoption and maintenance. Note: Trigger.dev's evidence coverage is thinner (coverage B vs A) — its score rests on fewer independent signal types.

A Botpress 86.6

The open-source hub to build & deploy GPT/LLM Agents ⚡️

botpress/botpress · #59 overall · #3 Workflow Platforms · coverage A (4/5)

Choose Botpress if supply-chain integrity matters most.

+4.2Safety / Integrity: 98% of recent commits signed, against 13%
A vs BEvidence coverage: 4 of 5 independent signal types, against 3

A Trigger.dev 87.9

Trigger.dev – build and deploy durable AI agents and workflows

triggerdotdev/trigger.dev · #41 overall · #2 Workflow Platforms · coverage B (3/5)

Choose Trigger.dev if adoption and maintenance matter most.

+2.5Adoption: 1.1M weekly downloads against 17.4k
+2.2Maintenance

Where they differ

19.9

Safety / IntegrityBotpress +4.2

15.7

17.7

MaintenanceTrigger.dev +2.2

19.9

15.7

AdoptionTrigger.dev +2.5

18.2

+1.7

Runtime calibrationTrigger.dev +0.8

+2.5

2 dimensions identical: Identity 18.0 · Transparency 13.6 · Full evidence table

An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of Botpress and Trigger.dev, two Workflow Platforms projects in the HVTracker registry. Scores come from public, checkable signals — supply-chain provenance, OSSF Scorecard, maintenance, and adoption — not popularity.

Full evidence

Signal	Botpressbotpress/botpress	Trigger.devtriggerdotdev/trigger.dev
HVTrust score	86.6	87.9
Evidence grade	A	A
Coverage grade	A	B
Overall rank	#59	#41
Rank in Workflow Platforms	#3	#2
GitHub stars	14.9k	16.4k
Last updated	1d ago	1d ago
Build provenance	Yes	Yes
OSSF Scorecard	6.0 / 10	6.0 / 10
License	MIT	Apache-2.0
Downloads	17k/wk	1.1M/wk
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25	19.9	15.7
Identity & provenance / 18	18.0	18.0
Transparency / 17	13.6	13.6
Maintenance / 20	17.7	19.9
Adoption / 20	15.7	18.2
Runtime capability surface (full matrix)
MCP server	—	Implemented
External providers	—	3 — OpenAI, Postgres, Redis
Requires API keys	Yes	No
Plugin surface	plugins	extensions
Provenance drift	Match	Match

Open in the live compare tool → Botpress profile Trigger.dev profile More Workflow Platforms →

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 →