What 88 graded repositories reveal

Every repo RepoGrade scores feeds these aggregates: how quality tracks reach, age, and maintenance, and what separates the best repos from the rest.

Repositories
88
C
Median score
59
out of 100
Median stars
408
GitHub stars
Median age
7 yr
83 measured
Ship releases
56%
84 measured
Are forks
2%
83 measured
AllPythonTypeScriptJavaScriptGoJava

How the corpus scores

Each dot is a repo, colored by grade. Corpus medians divide the four quadrants. Distributions below show the same data sliced by band and popularity tier.

Quality vs popularity

Hover a region to highlight it and see counts. Toggle the X axis between stars and contributors.

X axis
median 408★med. 59HIDDEN GEMS18 · 23%EXEMPLARY27 · 34%NEEDS WORK16 · 20%VIRAL, MESSY18 · 23%02550751001101001k10k100kStars (log scale)Score

Score distribution

Repos per 10-point band, colored by grade

Score by popularity tier

Box = P25-P75, line = median, whisker = P10-P90. Colored by grade.

Group by
0204060708090100ABCDF10-100n=11100-1kn=441k-10kn=19

GitHub stars · box = P25-P75, line = median, whisker = P10-P90

Scores climb steadily with popularity

Median score within each star tier. The grade mix hides this because most repos have few stars - but quality and reach rise together.

What top repos do that the rest don't

Average pass rate for A/B vs D/F repos, by dimension and by check. Filtered to C. Based on 72 repos.

Quality gap, by dimension

Average check pass rate across all checks in each category, for top-graded vs. bottom-graded repos.

Documentation+43pp
A/B
93%
D/F
50%

4 checks averaged

Engineering+62pp
A/B
86%
D/F
24%

6 checks averaged

Project health+16pp
A/B
100%
D/F
84%

2 checks averaged

Pass rates side by side

Each row is one check. Filled = A/B pass rate, hollow = D/F. +Npp = percentage-point gap.

D/F passA/B pass0%25%50%75%100%Linting and formatting+78ppReproducibility+77ppDependency manifest+72ppContributing guide+54ppREADME+52ppInstall and run instructions+51ppIssue and PR templates+51ppTests+48ppCI/CD+43ppHousekeeping+17ppRepository metadata+15ppLicense+15pp

All checks

CheckA / B pass rateD / F pass rateGap
Linting and formatting
100%
22%
+78
Reproducibility
86%
9%
+77
Dependency manifest
100%
28%
+72
Contributing guide
71%
17%
+54
README
100%
48%
+52
Install and run instructions
100%
49%
+51
Issue and PR templates
71%
20%
+51
Tests
100%
52%
+48
CI/CD
57%
14%
+43
Housekeeping
100%
83%
+17
Repository metadata
100%
85%
+15
License
100%
85%
+15

Does a better grade attract more attention?

Median traction signals per grade band. Toggle across stars, forks, watchers, open issues, and contributors.

Median traction by grade

Toggle across stars, forks, watchers, issues, contributors

Metric

How actively are repos maintained?

Release discipline and project posture signals - the upkeep story behind a grade.

Release discipline by grade

Share of repos shipping at least one tagged release, per grade band

Project posture

Fork quality penalty, archived repos, and release cadence

Quality: forks vs. original repos

Originals
59
Forks
32

Forks score 27 points lower on average (2 forks of 83 measured)

Archived (read-only)0%

0 of 83 measured

Ship releases56%

47 of 84 measured

Does age or size move the score?

Median score across how long a repo has existed and how large it is on disk.

Score by repo age

Median score across age cohorts

Score by repo size

Median score across size on disk