Registry › Compare › Opik vs Weights & Biases Weave

Opik vs Weights & Biases Weave

Weights & Biases Weave leads on trust: 84.2/100 (Grade A) against 78.7/100 (Grade B), a 5.5-point gap. Opik leads on maintenance and adoption; Weights & Biases Weave leads on supply-chain integrity and transparency.

B Opik 78.7

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

comet-ml/opik · #195 overall · #7 Observability & Evaluation · coverage A (4/5)

Choose Opik if maintenance and adoption matter most.

+3.8Adoption: 521k weekly downloads against 175.7k
+0.7Maintenance: last push today, against 1d ago

A Weights & Biases Weave 84.2

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

wandb/weave · #103 overall · #5 Observability & Evaluation · coverage A (4/5)

Choose Weights & Biases Weave if supply-chain integrity and transparency matter most.

+7.5Safety / Integrity
+5.4Transparency

Where they differ

12.2

Safety / IntegrityWeights & Biases Weave +7.5

19.7

8.5

TransparencyWeights & Biases Weave +5.4

13.9

20.0

MaintenanceOpik +0.7

19.3

18.1

AdoptionOpik +3.8

14.3

+1.9

Runtime calibrationOpik +2.9

-1.0

1 dimension identical: Identity 18.0 · Full evidence table

An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of Opik 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	Opikcomet-ml/opik	Weights & Biases Weavewandb/weave
HVTrust score	78.7	84.2
Evidence grade	B	A
Coverage grade	A	A
Overall rank	#195	#103
Rank in Observability & Evaluation	#7	#5
GitHub stars	22.7k	1.1k
Last updated	today	1d ago
Build provenance	Yes	Yes
OSSF Scorecard	—	6.3 / 10
License	Apache-2.0	Apache-2.0
Downloads	521k/wk	176k/wk
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25	12.2	19.7
Identity & provenance / 18	18.0	18.0
Transparency / 17	8.5	13.9
Maintenance / 20	20.0	19.3
Adoption / 20	18.1	14.3
Runtime capability surface (full matrix)
MCP server	Implemented	Implemented
External providers	4 — Amazon Bedrock, Anthropic, Multi-provider (LiteLLM), …	8 — Amazon Bedrock, Anthropic, Cohere, …
Requires API keys	No	Yes
Plugin surface	extensions	—
Provenance drift	Partial	Partial

Open in the live compare tool → Opik 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 →