Registry › Compare › Cherry Studio vs Neo

Cherry Studio vs Neo

Neo leads on trust: 88.3/100 (Grade A) against 67.1/100 (Grade B), a 21.2-point gap. Neo leads on supply-chain integrity and provenance, and rests on broader evidence.

B Cherry Studio 67.1

Your AI workspace for models, agents, and productivity.

CherryHQ/cherry-studio · #454 overall · #8 UI & App Builders · coverage C (2/5)

Cherry Studio doesn't lead on any scored dimension in this pair.

A Neo 88.3

Neo.mjs is a self-evolving software organism: a professional end-to-end AI engineering team whose cross-model swarm inhabits live apps via Neural Link, Active Hybrid GraphRAG, DreamService, and self-healing loops.

neomjs/neo · #58 overall · #2 UI & App Builders · coverage B (3/5)

Choose Neo if supply-chain integrity and provenance matter most.

+8.2Safety / Integrity: OSSF Scorecard 6.6 against 6.0
+7.2Identity / Provenance: package provenance attested, against none
+1.7Adoption
+0.5Transparency: OSSF Scorecard 6.6 against 6.0

Where they differ

12.5

Safety / IntegrityNeo +8.2

20.7

10.8

Identity / ProvenanceNeo +7.2

18.0

13.6

TransparencyNeo +0.5

14.1

11.3

AdoptionNeo +1.7

13.0

-1.1

Runtime calibrationNeo +3.6

+2.5

1 dimension identical: Maintenance 20.0 · Full evidence table

An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of Cherry Studio and Neo, two UI & App Builders projects in the HVTracker registry. Scores come from public, checkable signals — supply-chain provenance, OSSF Scorecard, maintenance, and adoption — not popularity.

Full evidence

Signal	Cherry StudioCherryHQ/cherry-studio	Neoneomjs/neo
HVTrust score	67.1	88.3
Evidence grade	B	A
Coverage grade	C	B
Overall rank	#454	#58
Rank in UI & App Builders	#8	#2
GitHub stars	53.4k	3.3k
Last updated	today	today
Build provenance	No	Yes
OSSF Scorecard	6.0 / 10	6.6 / 10
License	AGPL-3.0	MIT
Downloads	—	3k/wk
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25	12.5	20.7
Identity & provenance / 18	10.8	18.0
Transparency / 17	13.6	14.1
Maintenance / 20	20.0	20.0
Adoption / 20	11.3	13.0
Runtime capability surface (full matrix)
MCP server	Implemented	—
External providers	6 — Anthropic, DeepSeek, Firecrawl, …	—
Requires API keys	No	No
Plugin surface	extensions	plugins
Provenance drift	—	Match

Open in the live compare tool → Cherry Studio profile Neo profile More UI & App Builders →

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 v4.4 →