RegistryCompare › FastMCP vs MCP Inspector

FastMCP vs MCP Inspector

An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of FastMCP and MCP Inspector, two Protocols & Tool Integration projects in the HVTracker registry. Scores come from public, checkable signals — supply-chain provenance, OSSF Scorecard, maintenance, and adoption — not popularity.

MCP Inspector leads on trust — 83.2/100 (Grade A) vs 80.4/100 (Grade A), a 2.8-point gap. Full breakdown below.
Signal FastMCPPrefectHQ/fastmcp MCP Inspectormodelcontextprotocol/inspector
HVTrust score 80.4 83.2
Evidence grade A A
Coverage grade B B
Overall rank #104 #79
Rank in Protocols & Tool Integration #5 #4
GitHub stars 27.5k 10.8k
Last updated today today
Build provenance No Yes
OSSF Scorecard 5.4 / 10 6.6 / 10
License Apache-2.0
Downloads 10.4M/wk 185k/wk
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25 11.8 16.9
Identity & provenance / 18 10.8 18.0
Transparency / 17 13.1 5.6
Maintenance / 20 19.7 20.0
Adoption / 20 20.0 16.7
Runtime capability surface (full matrix)
MCP server Implemented Implemented
External providers 3 — Anthropic, Google Gemini, OpenAI
Requires API keys No No
Plugin surface
Provenance drift Match Match
Open in the live compare tool → FastMCP profile MCP Inspector profile More Protocols & Tool Integration →

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 →