Registry › Compare › LLM Guard vs NeMo Guardrails

LLM Guard vs NeMo Guardrails

NeMo Guardrails leads on trust: 72.1/100 (Grade B) against 53.9/100 (Grade C), a 18.2-point gap. NeMo Guardrails leads on maintenance and supply-chain integrity.

C LLM Guard 53.9

The Security Toolkit for LLM Interactions

protectai/llm-guard · #836 overall · #17 Security & Guardrails · coverage A (4/5)

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

B NeMo Guardrails 72.1

NeMo Guardrails is an open-source toolkit for easily adding programmable guardrails to LLM-based conversational systems.

NVIDIA-NeMo/Guardrails · #295 overall · #5 Security & Guardrails · coverage A (4/5)

Choose NeMo Guardrails if maintenance and supply-chain integrity matter most.

+10.6Maintenance: last push 1d ago, against 87d ago
+4.1Safety / Integrity: 100% of recent commits signed, against 60%
+1.8Adoption: 127.5k weekly downloads against 27.2k
+1.4Transparency: OSSF Scorecard 7.1 against 5.4

Where they differ

9.8

Safety / IntegrityNeMo Guardrails +4.1

13.9

13.1

TransparencyNeMo Guardrails +1.4

14.5

6.2

MaintenanceNeMo Guardrails +10.6

16.8

14.3

AdoptionNeMo Guardrails +1.8

16.1

-0.3

Runtime calibrationNeMo Guardrails +0.3

+0.0

1 dimension identical: Identity 10.8 · Full evidence table

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

Full evidence

Signal	LLM Guardprotectai/llm-guard	NeMo GuardrailsNVIDIA-NeMo/Guardrails
HVTrust score	53.9	72.1
Evidence grade	C	B
Coverage grade	A	A
Overall rank	#836	#295
Rank in Security & Guardrails	#17	#5
GitHub stars	3.2k	7.2k
Last updated	87d ago	1d ago
Build provenance	No	No
OSSF Scorecard	5.4 / 10	7.1 / 10
License	MIT	NOASSERTION
Downloads	27k/wk	128k/wk
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25	9.8	13.9
Identity & provenance / 18	10.8	10.8
Transparency / 17	13.1	14.5
Maintenance / 20	6.2	16.8
Adoption / 20	14.3	16.1
Runtime capability surface (full matrix)
MCP server	—	—
External providers	—	1 — OpenAI
Requires API keys	No	No
Plugin surface	plugins	—
Provenance drift	Unknown	Unknown

Open in the live compare tool → LLM Guard profile NeMo Guardrails profile More Security & Guardrails →

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 →