Registry › Compare › LangWatch vs OpenLLMetry

LangWatch vs OpenLLMetry

Both are Grade A and 0.8 points apart, so choose on what you weigh most. LangWatch leads on maintenance and rests on broader evidence; OpenLLMetry leads on supply-chain integrity and adoption.

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 maintenance matters most.

+3.6Maintenance: last push today, against 1d ago
A vs BEvidence coverage: 4 of 5 independent signal types, against 3

A OpenLLMetry 85.9

Open-source observability for your GenAI or LLM application, based on OpenTelemetry

traceloop/openllmetry · #85 overall · #4 Observability & Evaluation · coverage B (3/5)

Choose OpenLLMetry if supply-chain integrity and adoption matter most.

+1.8Safety / Integrity: OSSF Scorecard 6.3 against 4.9
+1.4Adoption: 449.4k weekly downloads against 83.1k
+1.2Transparency: OSSF Scorecard 6.3 against 4.9

Where they differ

17.7

Safety / IntegrityOpenLLMetry +1.8

19.5

12.7

TransparencyOpenLLMetry +1.2

13.9

20.0

MaintenanceLangWatch +3.6

16.4

15.4

AdoptionOpenLLMetry +1.4

16.8

+2.9

Runtime calibrationLangWatch +1.6

+1.3

1 dimension identical: Identity 18.0 · Full evidence table

An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of LangWatch and OpenLLMetry, 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	LangWatchlangwatch/langwatch	OpenLLMetrytraceloop/openllmetry
HVTrust score	86.7	85.9
Evidence grade	A	A
Coverage grade	A	B
Overall rank	#76	#85
Rank in Observability & Evaluation	#3	#4
GitHub stars	5.0k	7.5k
Last updated	today	1d ago
Build provenance	Yes	Yes
OSSF Scorecard	4.9 / 10	6.3 / 10
License	Apache-2.0	Apache-2.0
Downloads	83k/wk	449k/wk
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25	17.7	19.5
Identity & provenance / 18	18.0	18.0
Transparency / 17	12.7	13.9
Maintenance / 20	20.0	16.4
Adoption / 20	15.4	16.8
Runtime capability surface (full matrix)
MCP server	Implemented	Implemented
External providers	1 — Anthropic	9 — Amazon Bedrock, Anthropic, Cohere, …
Requires API keys	No	No
Plugin surface	plugins	—
Provenance drift	Partial	Match

Open in the live compare tool → LangWatch profile OpenLLMetry 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 →