quivr vs claude-mem — Trust Score Comparison

Side-by-side trust comparison of quivr and claude-mem. Scores based on security, compliance, maintenance, popularity, and ecosystem signals.

quivr scores 57.4/100 (C) while claude-mem scores 65.5/100 (B-) on the Nerq Trust Score. claude-mem leads by 8.1 points. quivr is a coding agent with 38,942 stars. claude-mem is a coding agent with 34,398 stars.
57.4
C
Categorycoding
Stars38,942
Sourcegithub
Security0
Compliance85
Maintenance1
Documentation0
vs
65.5
B-
Categorycoding
Stars34,398
Sourcegithub
Security1
Compliance87
Maintenance1
Documentation1

Detailed Metric Comparison

Metric quivr claude-mem
Trust Score57.4/10065.5/100
GradeCB-
Stars38,94234,398
Categorycodingcoding
Security01
Compliance8587
Maintenance11
Documentation01
EU AI Act RiskminimalN/A
VerifiedNoNo

Verdict

claude-mem leads with a trust score of 65.5/100 compared to quivr's 57.4/100 (a 8.1-point difference). claude-mem scores higher on security (1 vs 0), compliance (87 vs 85). However, quivr has stronger community adoption (38,942 vs 34,398 stars). Both agents should be evaluated based on your specific requirements.

Detailed Analysis

Security

claude-mem leads on security with a score of 1/100 compared to quivr's 0/100. This score reflects dependency vulnerability analysis, known CVE exposure, and security best practices. A higher security score means fewer known vulnerabilities and better security hygiene in the codebase.

Maintenance & Activity

quivr demonstrates stronger maintenance activity (1/100 vs 1/100). This metric captures commit frequency, issue response times, and release cadence. Actively maintained tools receive faster security patches and are less likely to accumulate technical debt.

Documentation

claude-mem has better documentation (1/100 vs 0/100). Good documentation reduces onboarding time and helps teams adopt the tool safely. This score evaluates README completeness, API documentation, code examples, and tutorial availability.

Community & Adoption

quivr has 38,942 GitHub stars while claude-mem has 34,398. Both tools have comparable community sizes, suggesting similar levels of ecosystem support and third-party resources.

When to Choose Each Tool

Choose quivr if you need:

  • Larger community (38,942 vs 34,398 stars)

Choose claude-mem if you need:

  • Higher overall trust score — more reliable for production use
  • Stronger security profile with fewer known vulnerabilities
  • Better documentation for faster onboarding

Switching from quivr to claude-mem (or vice versa)

When migrating between quivr and claude-mem, consider these factors:

  1. API Compatibility: quivr (coding) and claude-mem (coding) share similar interfaces since they are in the same category.
  2. Security Review: Run a security audit after migration. Check the quivr safety report and claude-mem safety report for known issues.
  3. Testing: Ensure your test suite covers all integration points before switching in production.
  4. Community Support: quivr has 38,942 stars and claude-mem has 34,398. Larger communities typically mean better Stack Overflow answers and migration guides.
quivr Safety Report claude-mem Safety Report quivr Alternatives claude-mem Alternatives

Related Pages

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is safer, quivr or claude-mem?
Based on Nerq's independent trust assessment, quivr has a trust score of 57.4/100 (C) while claude-mem scores 65.5/100 (B-). The 8.1-point difference suggests claude-mem has a stronger trust profile. Trust scores are based on security, compliance, maintenance, documentation, and community adoption.
How do quivr and claude-mem compare on security?
quivr has a security score of 0/100 and claude-mem scores 1/100. Both have comparable security profiles. quivr's compliance score is 85/100 (EU risk: minimal), while claude-mem's is 87/100 (EU risk: N/A).
Should I use quivr or claude-mem?
The choice depends on your requirements. quivr (coding, 38,942 stars) and claude-mem (coding, 34,398 stars) serve similar use cases. On trust, quivr scores 57.4/100 and claude-mem scores 65.5/100. Review the full KYA reports for each agent before making a decision. Consider factors like integration requirements, documentation quality (0 vs 1), and maintenance activity (1 vs 1).

Related Comparisons

Last updated: 2026-05-13 | Data refreshed weekly
Disclaimer: Nerq trust scores are automated assessments based on publicly available signals. They are not endorsements or guarantees. Always conduct your own due diligence.

We use cookies for analytics and caching. Privacy Policy