CAMEL vs Concordia
An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of CAMEL and Concordia, two Multi-Agent Systems projects in the HVTracker registry. Scores come from public, checkable signals — supply-chain provenance, OSSF Scorecard, maintenance, and adoption — not popularity.
CAMEL leads on trust — 68.7/100 (Grade B) vs 62.3/100 (Grade C), a 6.4-point gap. Full breakdown below.
| Signal | CAMELcamel-ai/camel | Concordiagoogle-deepmind/concordia |
|---|---|---|
| HVTrust score | 68.7 | 62.3 |
| Evidence grade | B | C |
| Coverage grade | A | B |
| Overall rank | #155 | #290 |
| Rank in Multi-Agent Systems | #3 | #9 |
| GitHub stars | 17.6k | 1.6k |
| Last updated | 5d ago | 6d ago |
| Build provenance | No | No |
| OSSF Scorecard | 6.8 / 10 | 7.8 / 10 |
| License | Apache-2.0 | Apache-2.0 |
| Downloads | 18k/wk | 570/wk |
| Trust dimensions (points earned) | ||
| Safety / integrity / 25 | 11.4 | 9.8 |
| Identity & provenance / 18 | 10.8 | 10.8 |
| Transparency / 17 | 14.3 | 15.1 |
| Maintenance / 20 | 17.5 | 14.0 |
| Adoption / 20 | 15.9 | 11.4 |
| Runtime capability surface (full matrix) | ||
| MCP server | Declared | Declared |
| External providers | 15 — Amazon Bedrock, Anthropic, Cohere, … | 6 — Amazon Bedrock, Anthropic, Google Gemini, … |
| Requires API keys | Yes | No |
| 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 →