PydanticAI vs Strands Agents
An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of PydanticAI and Strands Agents, two Agent Frameworks projects in the HVTracker registry. Scores come from public, checkable signals — supply-chain provenance, OSSF Scorecard, maintenance, and adoption — not popularity.
Strands Agents leads on trust — 90.1/100 (Grade A) vs 89.3/100 (Grade A), a 0.8-point gap. Note: Strands Agents's evidence coverage is thinner (coverage B vs A) — its score rests on fewer independent signal types. Full breakdown below.
| Signal | PydanticAIpydantic/pydantic-ai | Strands Agentsstrands-agents/harness-sdk |
|---|---|---|
| HVTrust score | 89.3 | 90.1 |
| Evidence grade | A | A |
| Coverage grade | A | B |
| Overall rank | #22 | #15 |
| Rank in Agent Frameworks | #7 | #6 |
| GitHub stars | 20.0k | 7.4k |
| Last updated | today | 1d ago |
| Build provenance | Yes | Yes |
| OSSF Scorecard | 6.4 / 10 | 5.4 / 10 |
| License | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| Downloads | 1.2M/wk | 9.5M/wk |
| Trust dimensions (points earned) | ||
| Safety / integrity / 25 | 20.5 | 19.2 |
| Identity & provenance / 18 | 18.0 | 18.0 |
| Transparency / 17 | 13.9 | 13.1 |
| Maintenance / 20 | 20.0 | 19.9 |
| Adoption / 20 | 18.4 | 18.6 |
| Runtime capability surface (full matrix) | ||
| MCP server | Declared | Implemented |
| External providers | 8 — Amazon Bedrock, Anthropic, Cohere, … | 4 — Amazon Bedrock, Anthropic, Google Gemini, … |
| Requires API keys | No | No |
| Plugin surface | — | extensions |
| Provenance drift | Match | Match |
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 v4.3 →