How OpenClaw scored an A.
A way.space signal summary built from public evidence. It is not a user rating, and not a safety certification. How scores are calculated.
01 / Breakdown
Derived from GitHub, not voted.
GitHub credibility score
code
84/100- ✓ Contributors & bus-factor: 15 recent contributors
- ✓ Commit recency: last commit 0d ago
- ✓ Commit cadence: 33136 commits in 90 days
- ✓ Issue close ratio: 92% of issues closed
- ✓ Release cadence: 100 releases in 12 months
- ✓ Stars (log-damped): 389,378 stars (log-damped)
- – Star authenticity: star-velocity check unavailable — GitHub no longer publishes stargazer timestamps for this repo
- – Dependent repos: not measurable — no package listing on a registry we can query
identity
60/100- ✓ Person: Created by Peter Steinberger · notable person
audits
Not measured- – Third-party scans: no third-party scan data from listed registries
freshness
100/100- ✓ Last shipped: last commit 0d ago — fast-churn harnesss are expected to ship about every 60d
community
63/100- ✓ Recommends: credibility-weighted recommend mass 1.0 from 1 builder
- ✓ Forum activity: 3 threads and replies in the gated forum
- ✓ Hacker News mentions: 46 Hacker News stories pointing at this tool
Identity and Community did not lower this score. Identity and Community can only ever add. They did not raise the average for OpenClaw, so the score shown is the one it would have without them. The components are still listed above, with their real values.
Components that could not be measured are left out of the average entirely, and their weight is redistributed, never scored as zero. Identity and Community are left out the same way when they would not have raised the score. How scores are calculated.