ECC vs Hermes Agent
ECC leads on trust: 90.9/100 (Grade A) against 84.0/100 (Grade A), a 6.9-point gap. ECC leads on supply-chain integrity; Hermes Agent leads on transparency.
The agent harness performance optimization system. Skills, instincts, memory, security, and research-first development for Claude Code, Codex, Opencode, Cursor and beyond.
Choose ECC if supply-chain integrity matters most.
- +4.1Safety / Integrity: 99% of recent commits signed, against 2%
The agent that grows with you
Choose Hermes Agent if transparency matters most.
- +0.6Transparency: OSSF Scorecard 6.3 against 5.7
Where they differ
1 dimension identical: Identity 18.0 · Full evidence table
An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of ECC and Hermes Agent, two Coding Agents projects in the HVTracker registry. Scores come from public, checkable signals — supply-chain provenance, OSSF Scorecard, maintenance, and adoption — not popularity.
Full evidence
| Signal | ECCaffaan-m/ECC | Hermes Agentnousresearch/hermes-agent |
|---|---|---|
| HVTrust score | 90.9 | 84.0 |
| Evidence grade | A | A |
| Coverage grade | B | B |
| Overall rank | #20 | #115 |
| Rank in Coding Agents | #2 | #7 |
| GitHub stars | 297.5k | 260.7k |
| Last updated | 3d ago | today |
| Build provenance | Yes | Yes |
| OSSF Scorecard | 5.7 / 10 | 6.3 / 10 |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Downloads | 20k/wk | 36k/wk |
| Trust dimensions (points earned) | ||
| Safety / integrity / 25 | 19.6 | 15.5 |
| Identity & provenance / 18 | 18.0 | 18.0 |
| Transparency / 17 | 13.3 | 13.9 |
| Maintenance / 20 | 19.8 | 20.0 |
| Adoption / 20 | 18.9 | 19.1 |
| Runtime capability surface (full matrix) | ||
| MCP server | Implemented | Implemented |
| External providers | 2 — Anthropic, OpenAI | 7 — Amazon Bedrock, Anthropic, ElevenLabs, … |
| Requires API keys | Yes | No |
| Plugin surface | plugins | plugins |
| Provenance drift | Match | Unknown |
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 →