Registry › Compare › Cognee vs LanceDB

Cognee vs LanceDB

Both are Grade A and 2.0 points apart, so choose on what you weigh most. Cognee leads on transparency; LanceDB leads on supply-chain integrity and adoption, and rests on broader evidence.

A Cognee 85.8

Cognee is the open-source AI memory platform for agents. Give your AI agents persistent long-term memory with small models for free

topoteretes/cognee · #80 overall · #7 Memory & Knowledge · coverage B (3/5)

Choose Cognee if transparency matters most.

+0.6Transparency: OSSF Scorecard 6.9 against 6.2

A LanceDB 87.8

Developer-friendly OSS embedded retrieval library for multimodal AI. Search More; Manage Less.

lancedb/lancedb · #44 overall · #3 Memory & Knowledge · coverage A (4/5)

Choose LanceDB if supply-chain integrity and adoption matter most.

+1.4Adoption: 1.8M weekly downloads against 26.9k
+0.8Safety / Integrity: 88% of recent commits signed, against 56%
A vs BEvidence coverage: 4 of 5 independent signal types, against 3

Where they differ

18.9

Safety / IntegrityLanceDB +0.8

19.7

14.4

TransparencyCognee +0.6

13.8

16.7

AdoptionLanceDB +1.4

18.1

-2.2

Runtime calibrationLanceDB +0.4

-1.8

2 dimensions identical: Identity 18.0 · Maintenance 20.0 · Full evidence table

An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of Cognee and LanceDB, two Memory & Knowledge projects in the HVTracker registry. Scores come from public, checkable signals — supply-chain provenance, OSSF Scorecard, maintenance, and adoption — not popularity.

Full evidence

Signal	Cogneetopoteretes/cognee	LanceDBlancedb/lancedb
HVTrust score	85.8	87.8
Evidence grade	A	A
Coverage grade	B	A
Overall rank	#80	#44
Rank in Memory & Knowledge	#7	#3
GitHub stars	31.8k	11.6k
Last updated	today	today
Build provenance	Yes	Yes
OSSF Scorecard	6.9 / 10	6.2 / 10
License	Apache-2.0	Apache-2.0
Downloads	27k/wk	1.8M/wk
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25	18.9	19.7
Identity & provenance / 18	18.0	18.0
Transparency / 17	14.4	13.8
Maintenance / 20	20.0	20.0
Adoption / 20	16.7	18.1
Runtime capability surface (full matrix)
MCP server	Implemented	—
External providers	9 — Amazon Bedrock, Anthropic, Groq, …	4 — Amazon Bedrock, Cohere, Google Gemini, …
Requires API keys	Yes	No
Plugin surface	extensions	plugins
Provenance drift	Match	Unknown

Open in the live compare tool → Cognee profile LanceDB profile More Memory & Knowledge →

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 →