Registry › Compare › OpenLLMetry vs Weights & Biases Weave

OpenLLMetry vs Weights & Biases Weave

Both are Grade A and 2.0 points apart, so choose on what you weigh most. OpenLLMetry leads on adoption; Weights & Biases Weave leads on maintenance and rests on broader evidence. Note: OpenLLMetry's evidence coverage is thinner (coverage B vs A) — its score rests on fewer independent signal types.

A OpenLLMetry 86.5

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

traceloop/openllmetry · #75 overall · #4 Observability & Evaluation · coverage B (3/5)

Choose OpenLLMetry if adoption matters most.

+2.5Adoption: 458.6k weekly downloads against 172.1k

A Weights & Biases Weave 84.5

Weave is a toolkit for developing AI-powered applications, built by Weights & Biases.

wandb/weave · #100 overall · #5 Observability & Evaluation · coverage A (4/5)

Choose Weights & Biases Weave if maintenance matters most.

+2.7Maintenance: last push today, against 2d ago
A vs BEvidence coverage: 4 of 5 independent signal types, against 3

Where they differ

19.7

Safety / IntegrityWeights & Biases Weave +0.1

19.8

14.0

TransparencyOpenLLMetry +0.1

13.9

16.9

MaintenanceWeights & Biases Weave +2.7

19.6

16.8

AdoptionOpenLLMetry +2.5

14.3

+1.1

Runtime calibrationOpenLLMetry +2.2

-1.1

1 dimension identical: Identity 18.0 · Full evidence table

An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of OpenLLMetry 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.

Full evidence

Signal	OpenLLMetrytraceloop/openllmetry	Weights & Biases Weavewandb/weave
HVTrust score	86.5	84.5
Evidence grade	A	A
Coverage grade	B	A
Overall rank	#75	#100
Rank in Observability & Evaluation	#4	#5
GitHub stars	7.5k	1.1k
Last updated	2d ago	today
Build provenance	Yes	Yes
OSSF Scorecard	6.5 / 10	6.3 / 10
License	Apache-2.0	Apache-2.0
Downloads	459k/wk	172k/wk
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25	19.7	19.8
Identity & provenance / 18	18.0	18.0
Transparency / 17	14.0	13.9
Maintenance / 20	16.9	19.6
Adoption / 20	16.8	14.3
Runtime capability surface (full matrix)
MCP server	Implemented	Implemented
External providers	9 — Amazon Bedrock, Anthropic, Cohere, …	8 — Amazon Bedrock, Anthropic, Cohere, …
Requires API keys	No	Yes
Plugin surface	—	—
Provenance drift	Match	Partial

Open in the live compare tool → OpenLLMetry 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 v4.4 →