Registry › Compare › Flyte vs Trigger.dev

Flyte vs Trigger.dev

Trigger.dev leads on trust: 87.2/100 (Grade A) against 72.3/100 (Grade B), a 14.9-point gap. Trigger.dev leads on supply-chain integrity and provenance.

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)

Flyte doesn't lead on any scored dimension in this pair.

A Trigger.dev 87.2

Trigger.dev – build and deploy durable AI agents and workflows

triggerdotdev/trigger.dev · #72 overall · #2 Workflow Platforms · coverage B (3/5)

Choose Trigger.dev if supply-chain integrity and provenance matter most.

+7.2Identity / Provenance: package provenance attested, against none
+3.0Safety / Integrity: OSSF Scorecard 6.0 against 5.8
+2.2Adoption: 1.8M weekly downloads against 163.1k

Where they differ

12.2

Safety / IntegrityTrigger.dev +3.0

15.2

10.8

Identity / ProvenanceTrigger.dev +7.2

18.0

13.4

TransparencyTrigger.dev +0.2

13.6

19.9

MaintenanceFlyte +0.1

19.8

16.3

AdoptionTrigger.dev +2.2

18.5

-0.3

Runtime calibrationTrigger.dev +2.4

+2.1

Full evidence table

An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of Flyte and Trigger.dev, 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	Flyteflyteorg/flyte	Trigger.devtriggerdotdev/trigger.dev
HVTrust score	72.3	87.2
Evidence grade	B	A
Coverage grade	B	B
Overall rank	#311	#72
Rank in Workflow Platforms	#7	#2
GitHub stars	7.8k	16.7k
Last updated	1d ago	3d ago
Build provenance	No	Yes
OSSF Scorecard	5.8 / 10	6.0 / 10
License	Apache-2.0	Apache-2.0
Downloads	163k/wk	1.8M/wk
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25	12.2	15.2
Identity & provenance / 18	10.8	18.0
Transparency / 17	13.4	13.6
Maintenance / 20	19.9	19.8
Adoption / 20	16.3	18.5
Runtime capability surface (full matrix)
MCP server	—	Implemented
External providers	—	4 — Anthropic, OpenAI, Postgres, …
Requires API keys	No	No
Plugin surface	plugins	extensions
Provenance drift	Unknown	Match

Open in the live compare tool → Flyte profile Trigger.dev 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 →