Registry › Compare › Langfuse vs LangWatch

Langfuse vs LangWatch

LangWatch leads on trust: 86.7/100 (Grade A) against 79.4/100 (Grade B), a 7.3-point gap. Langfuse leads on transparency and adoption; LangWatch leads on supply-chain integrity and provenance.

B Langfuse 79.4

🪢 Open source agent evals & observability: Trace, evaluate, and improve LLM applications with one open platform.

langfuse/langfuse · #187 overall · #6 Observability & Evaluation · coverage A (4/5)

Choose Langfuse if transparency and adoption matter most.

+4.6Adoption: 9.8M weekly downloads against 83.1k
+1.9Transparency: OSSF Scorecard 7.2 against 4.9

A LangWatch 86.7

Open-Source Agent Observability & Evals for AI Platform teams. Trace, test, route and govern every agent & coding assistant in the company.

langwatch/langwatch · #76 overall · #3 Observability & Evaluation · coverage A (4/5)

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

+7.2Identity / Provenance: package provenance attested, against none
+3.8Safety / Integrity: package provenance attested, against none

Where they differ

13.9

Safety / IntegrityLangWatch +3.8

17.7

10.8

Identity / ProvenanceLangWatch +7.2

18.0

14.6

TransparencyLangfuse +1.9

12.7

19.9

MaintenanceLangWatch +0.1

20.0

AdoptionLangfuse +4.6

15.4

+0.2

Runtime calibrationLangWatch +2.7

+2.9

Full evidence table

An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of Langfuse and LangWatch, two Observability & Evaluation projects in the HVTracker registry. Scores come from public, checkable signals — supply-chain provenance, OSSF Scorecard, maintenance, and adoption — not popularity.

Full evidence

Signal	Langfuselangfuse/langfuse	LangWatchlangwatch/langwatch
HVTrust score	79.4	86.7
Evidence grade	B	A
Coverage grade	A	A
Overall rank	#187	#76
Rank in Observability & Evaluation	#6	#3
GitHub stars	36.9k	5.0k
Last updated	1d ago	today
Build provenance	No	Yes
OSSF Scorecard	7.2 / 10	4.9 / 10
License	NOASSERTION	Apache-2.0
Downloads	9.8M/wk	83k/wk
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25	13.9	17.7
Identity & provenance / 18	10.8	18.0
Transparency / 17	14.6	12.7
Maintenance / 20	19.9	20.0
Adoption / 20	20.0	15.4
Runtime capability surface (full matrix)
MCP server	Implemented	Implemented
External providers	2 — Anthropic, OpenAI	1 — Anthropic
Requires API keys	Yes	No
Plugin surface	plugins	plugins
Provenance drift	Unknown	Partial

Open in the live compare tool → Langfuse profile LangWatch profile More Observability & Evaluation →

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 →