BoxLite vs E2B
An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of BoxLite and E2B, two Sandboxes & Runtimes projects in the HVTracker registry. Scores come from public, checkable signals — supply-chain provenance, OSSF Scorecard, maintenance, and adoption — not popularity.
BoxLite leads on trust — 85.1/100 (Grade A) vs 78.4/100 (Grade B), a 6.7-point gap. Note: BoxLite's evidence coverage is thinner (coverage B vs A) — its score rests on fewer independent signal types. Full breakdown below.
| Signal | BoxLiteboxlite-ai/boxlite | E2Be2b-dev/e2b |
|---|---|---|
| HVTrust score | 85.1 | 78.4 |
| Evidence grade | A | B |
| Coverage grade | B | A |
| Overall rank | #57 | #95 |
| Rank in Sandboxes & Runtimes | #1 | #2 |
| GitHub stars | 2.3k | 13.6k |
| Last updated | today | 1d ago |
| Build provenance | Yes | No |
| OSSF Scorecard | 5.0 / 10 | 6.7 / 10 |
| License | Apache-2.0 | Apache-2.0 |
| Downloads | 13k/wk | 982k/wk |
| Trust dimensions (points earned) | ||
| Safety / integrity / 25 | 18.8 | 12.6 |
| Identity & provenance / 18 | 18.0 | 10.8 |
| Transparency / 17 | 12.8 | 14.2 |
| Maintenance / 20 | 20.0 | 19.9 |
| Adoption / 20 | 13.5 | 17.9 |
| Runtime capability surface (full matrix) | ||
| MCP server | — | Declared |
| External providers | 2 — Postgres, Redis | 1 — E2B |
| Requires API keys | No | Yes |
| Plugin surface | plugins | — |
| Provenance drift | Match | Match |
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 →