RegistryCompare › Langfuse vs Weights & Biases Weave

Langfuse vs Weights & Biases Weave

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

Weights & Biases Weave leads on trust — 86.5/100 (Grade A) vs 78.1/100 (Grade B), a 8.4-point gap. Full breakdown below.
Signal Langfuselangfuse/langfuse Weights & Biases Weavewandb/weave
HVTrust score 78.1 86.5
Evidence grade B A
Coverage grade A A
Overall rank #77 #33
Rank in Observability & Evaluation #5 #3
GitHub stars 33.1k 1.1k
Last updated 1d ago today
Build provenance No Yes
OSSF Scorecard 6.5 / 10 6.4 / 10
License NOASSERTION Apache-2.0
Downloads 6.9M/wk 612k/wk
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25 12.7 20.4
Identity & provenance / 18 10.8 18.0
Transparency / 17 14.0 13.9
Maintenance / 20 19.9 20.0
Adoption / 20 20.0 15.0
Runtime capability surface (full matrix)
MCP server Implemented Implemented
External providers 1 — Anthropic 9 — Amazon Bedrock, Anthropic, Cohere, …
Requires API keys Yes No
Plugin surface plugins
Provenance drift Unknown Partial
Open in the live compare tool → Langfuse profile Weights & Biases Weave 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 v4.3 →