Registry › Compare › Opik vs Promptfoo

Opik vs Promptfoo

Promptfoo leads on trust: 91.9/100 (Grade A) against 78.6/100 (Grade B), a 13.3-point gap. Promptfoo leads on supply-chain integrity and transparency.

B Opik 78.6

Debug, evaluate, and monitor your LLM applications, RAG systems, and agentic workflows with comprehensive tracing, automated evaluations, and production-ready dashboards.

comet-ml/opik · #197 overall · #7 Observability & Evaluation · coverage A (4/5)

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

A Promptfoo 91.9

Test your prompts, agents, and RAGs. Red teaming/pentesting/vulnerability scanning for AI. Compare performance of GPT, Claude, Gemini, DeepSeek, and more. Simple declarative configs with command line and CI/CD integration. Used by OpenAI and Anthropic.

promptfoo/promptfoo · #9 overall · #1 Observability & Evaluation · coverage A (4/5)

Choose Promptfoo if supply-chain integrity and transparency matter most.

+9.3Safety / Integrity: 100% of recent commits signed, against 93%
+6.1Transparency

Where they differ

12.2

Safety / IntegrityPromptfoo +9.3

21.5

8.5

TransparencyPromptfoo +6.1

14.6

19.9

MaintenancePromptfoo +0.1

20.0

18.1

AdoptionPromptfoo +0.4

18.5

+1.9

Runtime calibrationOpik +2.6

-0.7

1 dimension identical: Identity 18.0 · Full evidence table

An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of Opik and Promptfoo, 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	Opikcomet-ml/opik	Promptfoopromptfoo/promptfoo
HVTrust score	78.6	91.9
Evidence grade	B	A
Coverage grade	A	A
Overall rank	#197	#9
Rank in Observability & Evaluation	#7	#1
GitHub stars	22.7k	26.1k
Last updated	1d ago	today
Build provenance	Yes	Yes
OSSF Scorecard	—	7.2 / 10
License	Apache-2.0	MIT
Downloads	521k/wk	892k/wk
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25	12.2	21.5
Identity & provenance / 18	18.0	18.0
Transparency / 17	8.5	14.6
Maintenance / 20	19.9	20.0
Adoption / 20	18.1	18.5
Runtime capability surface (full matrix)
MCP server	Implemented	Implemented
External providers	4 — Amazon Bedrock, Anthropic, Multi-provider (LiteLLM), …	3 — Amazon Bedrock, Anthropic, OpenAI
Requires API keys	No	Yes
Plugin surface	extensions	plugins
Provenance drift	Partial	Match

Open in the live compare tool → Opik profile Promptfoo 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 →