Registry › Compare › Concordia vs Open Multi-Agent

Concordia vs Open Multi-Agent

Concordia leads on trust: 67.6/100 (Grade B) against 60.8/100 (Grade C), a 6.8-point gap. Concordia leads on transparency and adoption, and rests on broader evidence; Open Multi-Agent leads on supply-chain integrity.

B Concordia 67.6

A library for generative social simulation

google-deepmind/concordia · #433 overall · #5 Multi-Agent Systems · coverage B (3/5)

Choose Concordia if transparency and adoption matter most.

+2.6Adoption
+1.8Transparency: OSSF Scorecard 7.8 against 5.6
+1.1Maintenance: last push 1d ago, against 4d ago
B vs CEvidence coverage: 3 of 5 independent signal types, against 2

C Open Multi-Agent 60.8

Self-hosted TypeScript agent runtime with durable approvals and verifiable run records. Own it, approve it, audit it.

open-multi-agent/open-multi-agent · #676 overall · #19 Multi-Agent Systems · coverage C (2/5)

Choose Open Multi-Agent if supply-chain integrity matters most.

+1.9Safety / Integrity: 100% of recent commits signed, against 7%

Where they differ

10.1

Safety / IntegrityOpen Multi-Agent +1.9

12.0

15.1

TransparencyConcordia +1.8

13.3

18.6

MaintenanceConcordia +1.1

17.5

11.8

AdoptionConcordia +2.6

9.2

+1.2

Runtime calibrationConcordia +3.2

-2.0

1 dimension identical: Identity 10.8 · Full evidence table

An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of Concordia and Open Multi-Agent, 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.

Full evidence

Signal	Concordiagoogle-deepmind/concordia	Open Multi-Agentopen-multi-agent/open-multi-agent
HVTrust score	67.6	60.8
Evidence grade	B	C
Coverage grade	B	C
Overall rank	#433	#676
Rank in Multi-Agent Systems	#5	#19
GitHub stars	1.9k	7.1k
Last updated	1d ago	4d ago
Build provenance	No	No
OSSF Scorecard	7.8 / 10	5.6 / 10
License	Apache-2.0	MIT
Downloads	920/wk	—
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25	10.1	12.0
Identity & provenance / 18	10.8	10.8
Transparency / 17	15.1	13.3
Maintenance / 20	18.6	17.5
Adoption / 20	11.8	9.2
Runtime capability surface (full matrix)
MCP server	Declared	Declared
External providers	6 — Amazon Bedrock, Anthropic, Google Gemini, …	3 — Anthropic, Google Gemini, OpenAI
Requires API keys	No	Yes
Plugin surface	—	—
Provenance drift	Match	—

Open in the live compare tool → Concordia profile Open Multi-Agent profile More Multi-Agent Systems →

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 →