Registry › Compare › Hatchet vs Nocobase

Hatchet vs Nocobase

Both are Grade B and 1.6 points apart, so choose on what you weigh most. Hatchet leads on supply-chain integrity and transparency; Nocobase leads on adoption and rests on broader evidence. Note: Hatchet's evidence coverage is thinner (coverage C vs B) — its score rests on fewer independent signal types.

B Hatchet 67.3

🪓 An orchestration engine for background tasks, AI agents, and durable workflows

hatchet-dev/hatchet · #439 overall · #8 Workflow Platforms · coverage C (2/5)

Choose Hatchet if supply-chain integrity and transparency matter most.

+4.1Safety / Integrity: 96% of recent commits signed, against 65%
+1.7Transparency: OSSF Scorecard 6.3 against 4.3

B Nocobase 65.7

NocoBase is an open-source AI + no-code platform for building business systems fast. Instead of generating everything from scratch, AI works on top of production-proven infrastructure and a WYSIWYG no-code interface, so you get both speed and reliability.

nocobase/nocobase · #491 overall · #10 Workflow Platforms · coverage B (3/5)

Choose Nocobase if adoption matters most.

+2.8Adoption: 24.6k GitHub stars against 8.1k
B vs CEvidence coverage: 3 of 5 independent signal types, against 2

Where they differ

12.7

Safety / IntegrityHatchet +4.1

8.6

13.9

TransparencyHatchet +1.7

12.2

20.0

MaintenanceHatchet +0.3

19.7

9.4

AdoptionNocobase +2.8

12.2

+0.5

Runtime calibrationNocobase +1.7

+2.2

1 dimension identical: Identity 10.8 · Full evidence table

An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of Hatchet and Nocobase, 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	Hatchethatchet-dev/hatchet	Nocobasenocobase/nocobase
HVTrust score	67.3	65.7
Evidence grade	B	B
Coverage grade	C	B
Overall rank	#439	#491
Rank in Workflow Platforms	#8	#10
GitHub stars	8.1k	24.6k
Last updated	today	today
Build provenance	No	No
OSSF Scorecard	6.3 / 10	4.3 / 10
License	MIT	NOASSERTION
Downloads	—	16/wk
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25	12.7	8.6
Identity & provenance / 18	10.8	10.8
Transparency / 17	13.9	12.2
Maintenance / 20	20.0	19.7
Adoption / 20	9.4	12.2
Runtime capability surface (full matrix)
MCP server	Implemented	Declared
External providers	4 — Amazon Bedrock, Anthropic, OpenAI, …	4 — Anthropic, DeepSeek, Google Gemini, …
Requires API keys	No	No
Plugin surface	—	plugins
Provenance drift	—	Match

Open in the live compare tool → Hatchet profile Nocobase 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 →