Registry › Compare › E2B vs OpenSandbox

E2B vs OpenSandbox

E2B leads on trust: 77.6/100 (Grade B) against 70.6/100 (Grade B), a 7.0-point gap. E2B leads on supply-chain integrity and transparency, and rests on broader evidence; OpenSandbox leads on maintenance.

B E2B 77.6

Open-source, secure environment with real-world tools for enterprise-grade agents.

e2b-dev/e2b · #199 overall · #2 Sandboxes & Runtimes · coverage A (4/5)

Choose E2B if supply-chain integrity and transparency matter most.

+6.4Safety / Integrity: 77% of recent commits signed, against 4%
+1.9Transparency: OSSF Scorecard 6.8 against 4.6
+1.3Adoption: 1.7M weekly downloads against 144.2k
A vs BEvidence coverage: 4 of 5 independent signal types, against 3

B OpenSandbox 70.6

Secure, Fast, and Extensible Sandbox runtime for AI agents.

opensandbox-group/OpenSandbox · #335 overall · #5 Sandboxes & Runtimes · coverage B (3/5)

Choose OpenSandbox if maintenance matters most.

+1.0Maintenance

Where they differ

12.3

Safety / IntegrityE2B +6.4

5.9

14.3

TransparencyE2B +1.9

12.4

18.9

MaintenanceOpenSandbox +1.0

19.9

18.3

AdoptionE2B +1.3

17.0

+3.0

Runtime calibrationOpenSandbox +1.6

+4.6

1 dimension identical: Identity 10.8 · Full evidence table

An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of E2B and OpenSandbox, two Sandboxes & Runtimes projects in the HVTracker registry. Scores come from public, checkable signals — supply-chain provenance, OSSF Scorecard, maintenance, and adoption — not popularity.

Full evidence

Signal	E2Be2b-dev/e2b	OpenSandboxopensandbox-group/OpenSandbox
HVTrust score	77.6	70.6
Evidence grade	B	B
Coverage grade	A	B
Overall rank	#199	#335
Rank in Sandboxes & Runtimes	#2	#5
GitHub stars	14.3k	15.8k
Last updated	1d ago	1d ago
Build provenance	No	No
OSSF Scorecard	6.8 / 10	4.6 / 10
License	Apache-2.0	Apache-2.0
Downloads	1.7M/wk	144k/wk
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25	12.3	5.9
Identity & provenance / 18	10.8	10.8
Transparency / 17	14.3	12.4
Maintenance / 20	18.9	19.9
Adoption / 20	18.3	17.0
Runtime capability surface (full matrix)
MCP server	Declared	Implemented
External providers	1 — E2B	2 — Postgres, Redis
Requires API keys	Yes	No
Plugin surface	—	extensions
Provenance drift	Match	Match

Open in the live compare tool → E2B profile OpenSandbox profile More Sandboxes & Runtimes →

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 →