Registry › Compare › LiteLLM vs Ollama

LiteLLM vs Ollama

LiteLLM leads on trust: 78.1/100 (Grade B) against 67.5/100 (Grade B), a 10.6-point gap. LiteLLM leads on supply-chain integrity and adoption, and rests on broader evidence.

B LiteLLM 78.1

The fastest, litest AI Gateway. Rust core with Python SDK. Call 100+ LLM APIs in OpenAI (or native) format with cost tracking, guardrails, load balancing, and logging [Bedrock, Azure, OpenAI, Anthropic, OpenAI, VertexAI, vLLM, Nvidia NIM]

BerriAI/litellm · #208 overall · #4 LLM Gateways & Infra · coverage A (4/5)

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

+7.4Adoption
+1.3Safety / Integrity: 100% of recent commits signed, against 86%
A vs BEvidence coverage: 4 of 5 independent signal types, against 3

B Ollama 67.5

Get up and running with Kimi, GLM, MiniMax, DeepSeek, gpt-oss, Qwen, Gemma and other models.

ollama/ollama · #434 overall · #5 LLM Gateways & Infra · coverage B (3/5)

Ollama doesn't lead on any scored dimension in this pair.

Where they differ

12.4

Safety / IntegrityLiteLLM +1.3

11.1

13.5

TransparencyLiteLLM +0.4

13.1

20.0

MaintenanceLiteLLM +0.1

19.9

20.0

AdoptionLiteLLM +7.4

12.6

+1.4

Runtime calibrationLiteLLM +1.4

+0.0

1 dimension identical: Identity 10.8 · Full evidence table

An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of LiteLLM and Ollama, two LLM Gateways & Infra projects in the HVTracker registry. Scores come from public, checkable signals — supply-chain provenance, OSSF Scorecard, maintenance, and adoption — not popularity.

Full evidence

Signal	LiteLLMBerriAI/litellm	Ollamaollama/ollama
HVTrust score	78.1	67.5
Evidence grade	B	B
Coverage grade	A	B
Overall rank	#208	#434
Rank in LLM Gateways & Infra	#4	#5
GitHub stars	62.6k	185.7k
Last updated	today	1d ago
Build provenance	No	No
OSSF Scorecard	5.9 / 10	5.4 / 10
License	NOASSERTION	MIT
Downloads	23.1M/wk	—
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25	12.4	11.1
Identity & provenance / 18	10.8	10.8
Transparency / 17	13.5	13.1
Maintenance / 20	20.0	19.9
Adoption / 20	20.0	12.6
Runtime capability surface (full matrix)
MCP server	Implemented	—
External providers	7 — Amazon Bedrock, Anthropic, Google Gemini, …	—
Requires API keys	Yes	No
Plugin surface	plugins	—
Provenance drift	Match	—

Open in the live compare tool → LiteLLM profile Ollama profile More LLM Gateways & Infra →

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 →