Registry › Compare › Concordia vs Open Multi-Agent

Concordia vs Open Multi-Agent

Concordia leads on trust: 65.5/100 (Grade B) against 61.7/100 (Grade C), a 3.8-point gap. Concordia leads on adoption and transparency, and rests on broader evidence; Open Multi-Agent leads on supply-chain integrity and maintenance.

B Concordia 65.5

A library for generative social simulation

google-deepmind/concordia · #454 overall · #8 Multi-Agent Systems · coverage B (3/5)

Choose Concordia if adoption and transparency matter most.

+2.3Adoption
+1.8Transparency: OSSF Scorecard 7.6 against 5.5
B vs CEvidence coverage: 3 of 5 independent signal types, against 2

C Open Multi-Agent 61.7

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

open-multi-agent/open-multi-agent · #584 overall · #12 Multi-Agent Systems · coverage C (2/5)

Choose Open Multi-Agent if supply-chain integrity and maintenance matter most.

+1.9Safety / Integrity: 97% of recent commits signed, against 7%
+1.6Maintenance: last push 1d ago, against 3d ago

Where they differ

9.8

Safety / IntegrityOpen Multi-Agent +1.9

11.7

15.0

TransparencyConcordia +1.8

13.2

17.2

MaintenanceOpen Multi-Agent +1.6

18.8

11.5

AdoptionConcordia +2.3

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	65.5	61.7
Evidence grade	B	C
Coverage grade	B	C
Overall rank	#454	#584
Rank in Multi-Agent Systems	#8	#12
GitHub stars	1.7k	7.0k
Last updated	3d ago	1d ago
Build provenance	No	No
OSSF Scorecard	7.6 / 10	5.5 / 10
License	Apache-2.0	MIT
Downloads	589/wk	—
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25	9.8	11.7
Identity & provenance / 18	10.8	10.8
Transparency / 17	15.0	13.2
Maintenance / 20	17.2	18.8
Adoption / 20	11.5	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 v4.3 →