Registry › Compare › Dify vs Flyte

Dify vs Flyte

Both are Grade B and 4.5 points apart, so choose on what you weigh most. Dify leads on adoption and rests on broader evidence; Flyte leads on supply-chain integrity and transparency.

B Dify 76.8

Build Agentic workflows, RAG pipelines, with rich AI model and tool support on one collaborative workspace. Deploy on cloud, VPC, or self-hosted, so teams move from prototype to production without rebuilding the stack.

langgenius/dify · #230 overall · #6 Workflow Platforms · coverage A (4/5)

Choose Dify if adoption matters most.

+3.7Adoption: 25.6M weekly downloads against 163.1k
A vs BEvidence coverage: 4 of 5 independent signal types, against 3

B Flyte 72.3

Type-safe, distributed orchestration of agents, ML pipelines, and real-time inference on your k8s — in pure Python with async/await, also other languages (rust, go and ts)

flyteorg/flyte · #311 overall · #7 Workflow Platforms · coverage B (3/5)

Choose Flyte if supply-chain integrity and transparency matter most.

+0.7Safety / Integrity: OSSF Scorecard 5.8 against 5.2
+0.5Transparency: OSSF Scorecard 5.8 against 5.2

Where they differ

11.5

Safety / IntegrityFlyte +0.7

12.2

12.9

TransparencyFlyte +0.5

13.4

20.0

AdoptionDify +3.7

16.3

+1.7

Runtime calibrationDify +2.0

-0.3

2 dimensions identical: Identity 10.8 · Maintenance 19.9 · Full evidence table

An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of Dify and Flyte, two Workflow Platforms projects in the HVTracker registry. Scores come from public, checkable signals — supply-chain provenance, OSSF Scorecard, maintenance, and adoption — not popularity.

Full evidence

Signal	Difylanggenius/dify	Flyteflyteorg/flyte
HVTrust score	76.8	72.3
Evidence grade	B	B
Coverage grade	A	B
Overall rank	#230	#311
Rank in Workflow Platforms	#6	#7
GitHub stars	160.3k	7.8k
Last updated	1d ago	1d ago
Build provenance	No	No
OSSF Scorecard	5.2 / 10	5.8 / 10
License	NOASSERTION	Apache-2.0
Downloads	25.6M/wk	163k/wk
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25	11.5	12.2
Identity & provenance / 18	10.8	10.8
Transparency / 17	12.9	13.4
Maintenance / 20	19.9	19.9
Adoption / 20	20.0	16.3
Runtime capability surface (full matrix)
MCP server	Declared	—
External providers	—	—
Requires API keys	No	No
Plugin surface	plugins	plugins
Provenance drift	Partial	Unknown

Open in the live compare tool → Dify profile Flyte profile More Workflow Platforms →

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 →