Registry › Compare › Guardrails AI vs HOL Guard

Guardrails AI vs HOL Guard

HOL Guard leads on trust: 92.2/100 (Grade A) against 76.9/100 (Grade B), a 15.3-point gap. Guardrails AI leads on adoption and rests on broader evidence; HOL Guard leads on maintenance and supply-chain integrity. Note: HOL Guard's evidence coverage is thinner (coverage B vs A) — its score rests on fewer independent signal types.

B Guardrails AI 76.9

Adding guardrails to large language models.

guardrails-ai/guardrails · #194 overall · #4 Security & Guardrails · coverage A (4/5)

Choose Guardrails AI if adoption matters most.

  • +3.2Adoption: 31.5k weekly downloads against 9.1k
  • A vs BEvidence coverage: 4 of 5 independent signal types, against 3
A HOL Guard 92.2

Open-source antivirus for AI agents: block risky tools, secret access, prompt injection, malicious packages, MCP servers, plugins, and skills at runtime.

hashgraph-online/hol-guard · #7 overall · #1 Security & Guardrails · coverage B (3/5)

Choose HOL Guard if maintenance and supply-chain integrity matter most.

  • +8.0Maintenance
  • +4.4Safety / Integrity: OSSF Scorecard 9.6 against 6.0
  • +3.1Transparency: OSSF Scorecard 9.6 against 6.0

Where they differ

20.0
Safety / IntegrityHOL Guard +4.4
24.4
13.6
TransparencyHOL Guard +3.1
16.7
12.0
MaintenanceHOL Guard +8.0
20.0
15.3
AdoptionGuardrails AI +3.2
12.1
-2.0
Runtime calibrationHOL Guard +3.0
+1.0

1 dimension identical: Identity 18.0 · Full evidence table

An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of Guardrails AI and HOL Guard, two Security & Guardrails projects in the HVTracker registry. Scores come from public, checkable signals — supply-chain provenance, OSSF Scorecard, maintenance, and adoption — not popularity.

Full evidence

Signal Guardrails AIguardrails-ai/guardrails HOL Guardhashgraph-online/hol-guard
HVTrust score 76.9 92.2
Evidence grade B A
Coverage grade A B
Overall rank #194 #7
Rank in Security & Guardrails #4 #1
GitHub stars 7.5k 684
Last updated today today
Build provenance Yes Yes
OSSF Scorecard 6.0 / 10 9.6 / 10
License Apache-2.0 Apache-2.0
Downloads 32k/wk 9k/wk
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25 20.0 24.4
Identity & provenance / 18 18.0 18.0
Transparency / 17 13.6 16.7
Maintenance / 20 12.0 20.0
Adoption / 20 15.3 12.1
Runtime capability surface (full matrix)
MCP server — Implemented
External providers 3 — Anthropic, Multi-provider (LiteLLM), OpenAI 3 — Anthropic, Google Gemini, Multi-provider (LiteLLM)
Requires API keys Yes No
Plugin surface — extensions
Provenance drift Unknown Match
Open in the live compare tool → Guardrails AI profile HOL Guard profile More Security & Guardrails →

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 →