Registry › Compare › FastMCP vs mcpc

FastMCP vs mcpc

Both are Grade A and 2.4 points apart, so choose on what you weigh most. FastMCP leads on maintenance and adoption; mcpc leads on supply-chain integrity and provenance.

A FastMCP 80.9

🚀 The fast, Pythonic way to build MCP servers and clients.

PrefectHQ/fastmcp · #150 overall · #10 Protocols & Tool Integration · coverage B (3/5)

Choose FastMCP if maintenance and adoption matter most.

+8.3Adoption: 13.7M weekly downloads against 2.2k
+1.6Maintenance
+0.9Transparency: OSSF Scorecard 5.5 against 4.5

A mcpc 83.3

The most compatible MCP CLI client. Supports: tools, resources, prompts, completions, async tasks, skills, stdio and streamable HTTP (MCP 2026-07-28 and 2025-11-25), persistent sessions, OAuth 2.1 with DCR, CIMD, client credentials, and ID-JAG, OS keychain, --json for code mode, grep for tool…

apify/mcpc · #117 overall · #8 Protocols & Tool Integration · coverage B (3/5)

Choose mcpc if supply-chain integrity and provenance matter most.

+7.2Identity / Provenance: package provenance attested, against none
+6.0Safety / Integrity: package provenance attested, against none

Where they differ

11.9

Safety / Integritymcpc +6.0

17.9

10.8

Identity / Provenancemcpc +7.2

18.0

13.2

TransparencyFastMCP +0.9

12.3

20.0

MaintenanceFastMCP +1.6

18.4

20.0

AdoptionFastMCP +8.3

11.7

Full evidence table

An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of FastMCP and mcpc, 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.

Full evidence

Signal	FastMCPPrefectHQ/fastmcp	mcpcapify/mcpc
HVTrust score	80.9	83.3
Evidence grade	A	A
Coverage grade	B	B
Overall rank	#150	#117
Rank in Protocols & Tool Integration	#10	#8
GitHub stars	28.2k	1.1k
Last updated	today	today
Build provenance	No	Yes
OSSF Scorecard	5.5 / 10	4.5 / 10
License	Apache-2.0	Apache-2.0
Downloads	13.7M/wk	2k/wk
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25	11.9	17.9
Identity & provenance / 18	10.8	18.0
Transparency / 17	13.2	12.3
Maintenance / 20	20.0	18.4
Adoption / 20	20.0	11.7
Runtime capability surface (full matrix)
MCP server	Implemented	Implemented
External providers	3 — Anthropic, Google Gemini, OpenAI	—
Requires API keys	No	Yes
Plugin surface	—	—
Provenance drift	Match	Match

Open in the live compare tool → FastMCP profile mcpc 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 v4.4 →