---

🚨 What our data found (June 2026)

This isn't a list of logos. Every entry is an evidence-linked evaluation across security, privacy, performance, transparency, and operations — and the findings are uncomfortable:

• ⚠️ 21 of 60 models in the registry are retired, deprecated, superseded, or were never released — including models still hardcoded in thousands of production apps (Grok 3 now silently redirects to a different model; Gemini 2.0 Flash was shut down June 1).
• 🩸 Archived MCP reference servers ship unpatched SQL injection. The Postgres reference server was still pulling ~21k weekly downloads after being archived with a known SQLi — we score it 51/100 on security so you don't find out the hard way.
• 🕳️ Popularity ≠ safety. Context7 (57k★, the most-starred MCP server on GitHub) scores 86/100 on performance but 59/100 on security after the "ContextCrush" registry-poisoning vulnerability. Playwright MCP: 88 performance, 60 security.
• 🔓 The agent you let browse the web matters. General-purpose autonomous agents score as low as 50/100 on privacy in our registry; sandboxed, permission-gated coding agents score 20+ points higher.
• ⏳ The OpenAI Assistants API sunsets August 26, 2026. If you're on it, your migration window is measured in weeks. It's flagged.

Every one of these claims links to a primary source with a date. That's the whole point.

---

📊 Frontier models, scored on what benchmarks ignore

Overall = mean of 5 dimension scores. Full criteria, evidence URLs, and confidence levels in each JSON file.

Model	Overall	Perf	Security	Privacy	Transparency	Ops
Claude Fable 5 (Anthropic)	92	98	92	93	88	91
Claude Opus 4.8 (Anthropic)	92	96	92	93	88	91
GPT-5.5 (OpenAI)	91	97	89	87	90	94
Gemini 3.1 Pro (Google)	91	96	88	88	88	93
Mistral Large 3 (Mistral, open)	85	88	83	87	80	86
Grok 4.3 (xAI)	83	94	83	76	82	82
DeepSeek-V4 (open)	83	92	83	78	80	83
GLM-5 (Z.ai, open)	82	92	80	75	81	83
Kimi K2.6 (Moonshot, open)	81	91	79	75	80	82

Notice the spread: models within 5 points of each other on capability differ by 15+ points on privacy and security. If you're choosing a model for healthcare, legal, or finance, the right-hand columns are the ones that get you fired.

And it's not just models — the same lens on coding agents (Claude Code 80, OpenAI Codex 82, Devin 71, Manus 64) and MCP servers (GitHub 82, Playwright 80, Context7 79, archived Postgres 72) exposes exactly where the trust gaps are.

---

🎯 Why this exists

Leaderboards answer "which model is smartest?" Nobody was answering:

• Can this model touch PHI under HIPAA? What's its actual data-retention policy — with a link?
• Is this MCP server maintained, or was it quietly archived with an open CVE?
• Does this agent framework sandbox tool execution, or does prompt injection mean shell access?
• Is this API deprecated, and what's the shutdown date?

TrustVector evaluates every entity across 5 dimensions — like a CVSS score for AI systems:

Dimension	What it covers
⚡ Performance & Reliability	Benchmarks, latency, uptime, context limits
🔒 Security	Prompt-injection resistance, jailbreaks, sandboxing, CVE history
🔐 Privacy & Compliance	Data residency, retention, training opt-out, HIPAA/GDPR/SOC 2
🔍 Trust & Transparency	Hallucination rate, explainability, model cards, open source
🛠️ Operational Excellence	API/SDK quality, versioning policy, ecosystem, support

Three rules make it trustworthy:

1. Every score has evidence — a primary source URL, a date, and a methodology.
2. Every score has a confidence level — high / medium / low. We tell you when we're not sure.
3. Everything is a JSON file in git — disagree with a score? Open a PR with better evidence. That's the protocol.

---

⚡ 30-second start

git clone https://github.com/guard0-ai/TrustVector.git
cd TrustVector && npm install && npm run dev   # → http://localhost:3000

Or skip the website — the data is just JSON:

import fable5 from './data/models/claude-fable-5.json';

fable5.trust_vector.security.overall_score;                     // 92
fable5.trust_vector.privacy_compliance.criteria.data_retention; // evidence, URL, date, confidence
fable5.use_case_ratings['healthcare'];                          // { overall, notes, alternatives }

Weight it like CVSS — your risk profile, your score

import { calculateCustomScore, WEIGHTING_PROFILES } from '@/framework/calculator/custom-score';

calculateCustomScore(entity, WEIGHTING_PROFILES.healthcare);   // HIPAA-weighted
calculateCustomScore(entity, WEIGHTING_PROFILES.security_first);

// or roll your own
calculateCustomScore(entity, {
  performance_reliability: 0.20,
  security: 0.30,
  privacy_compliance: 0.25,
  trust_transparency: 0.15,
  operational_excellence: 0.10,
});

Predefined profiles: balanced · security_first · performance_focused · enterprise · healthcare · financial · startup

---

📦 Current Coverage

156 evaluations across 3 categories (last refreshed June 2026 — yes, including the models that launched this month):

🧠 AI Models (60) — Claude Fable 5 → archived also-rans, all scored

Frontier: Claude Fable 5, Opus 4.8/4.7/4.6/4.5, Sonnet 4.6/4.5, Haiku 4.5 · GPT-5.5, GPT-5.4, GPT-5.3-Codex, GPT-5.2, GPT-5.1, GPT-5, o-series · Gemini 3.1 Pro, Gemini 3.5 Flash, Gemini 3 · Grok 4.3, Grok 4.1 · Nova 2 Lite, Nova Pro

Open-weight: DeepSeek V4 / V3.2 / R1 · Qwen3.5 · Kimi K2.6 · GLM-5 · MiniMax-M2 · Mistral Large 3 · Command A+ · Gemma 4 / 3 · gpt-oss-120b/20b · Llama 4 / 3.x · Nemotron

Browse all models →

🤖 AI Agents (50) — coding agents, frameworks, enterprise platforms

Coding & autonomous: Claude Code, Claude Agent SDK, OpenAI Codex, Devin, Cursor, GitHub Copilot coding agent, Google Jules, Gemini CLI, Manus

Frameworks: OpenAI Agents SDK, Google ADK, Microsoft Agent Framework, AWS Strands, LangGraph, CrewAI, LlamaIndex, Pydantic AI, smolagents, Mastra, Dify

Enterprise: Amazon Bedrock Agents, Azure Bot Service, Gemini Enterprise Agent Platform, IBM watsonx Assistant, Dialogflow, Lex, and more — plus deprecated/archived projects (Swarm, AgentGPT, BabyAGI…) clearly flagged

Browse all agents →

🔌 MCP Servers (46) — incl. security advisories on archived servers

Top ecosystem: Context7, Chrome DevTools MCP, Playwright MCP, Serena

Official vendor: GitHub, Figma, Stripe, Notion, Vercel, Hugging Face, Zapier, Apify, Firecrawl, shadcn

Reference: the 7 actively maintained servers (fetch, git, filesystem, memory, time, sequential-thinking, everything) — plus the archived ones (Puppeteer, Postgres, SQLite, Slack, …) flagged with security advisories so you don't npx your way into a CVE

Browse all MCPs →

---

🤝 Contribute an evaluation (it's just a PR)

The registry stays honest because anyone can challenge it. Add or update an evaluation:

# 1. Start from an existing evaluation as your template
cp data/models/claude-fable-5.json data/models/your-model-name.json

# 2. Fill in scores — every score needs evidence (source, URL, date) + confidence level

# 3. Validate against the schema
npm run validate

# 4. Open a PR
git checkout -b evaluation/your-model-name && git add data/ && git commit -m "Add evaluation for X"

We review within 48 hours. Found a score you disagree with? Bring a better source and open a PR — that's how the system is supposed to work. See CONTRIBUTING.md.

Scoring scale

Range	Meaning
90–100	Exceptional — industry leading
75–89	Strong — meets enterprise requirements
60–74	Adequate — usable with caveats
40–59	Concerning — significant gaps
0–39	Poor — not recommended

Full scoring rules, confidence definitions, and evidence requirements: METHODOLOGY.md

---

🆚 How it compares

	TrustVector	Leaderboards	Vendor model cards
Security & privacy scored	✅	❌	⚠️ self-reported
Evidence URL on every score	✅	⚠️	❌
Confidence levels	✅	❌	❌
Covers agents & MCP servers	✅	❌	❌
Flags deprecated/archived/CVE'd entries	✅	❌	❌
Custom CVSS-style weighting	✅	❌	❌
Disagreement protocol	PR with sources	❌	❌
License	MIT, all data in git	varies	proprietary

---

🏗️ Project structure

trustvector/
├── data/               # The registry — one JSON file per evaluation
│   ├── models/         # 60 model evaluations
│   ├── agents/         # 50 agent evaluations
│   ├── mcps/           # 46 MCP server evaluations
│   └── use-cases/      # Use-case taxonomy (healthcare, finance, …)
├── framework/          # Schema, Zod validation, custom-score calculator
├── app/                # Next.js site (static export, zero tracking)
└── scripts/            # CI validation — every PR is schema-checked

TrustVector itself collects nothing: no cookies, no tracking, static site generation, every evaluation version-controlled and validated in CI.

---

⭐ Star history

If TrustVector saved you from a deprecated API, an archived dependency, or a compliance surprise — star the repo. Stars are how more teams find out their MCP server has a CVE.

---

🙏 Acknowledgments

Methodology inspired by CVSS, OWASP LLM Top 10, RiskRubric.ai, and LMSYS Chatbot Arena. Built with Next.js, TypeScript, Tailwind, Recharts, and Zod.

📬 Community

• 🐛 Issues — bugs and evaluation corrections
• 💬 Discussions — questions and proposals
• 🔒 SECURITY.md — report vulnerabilities
• 🗺️ ROADMAP.md — what's next

📜 License

MIT — see LICENSE. The data is yours to build on.

---