rwf2/rocket vs tokio-rs/axum
tokio-rs/axum shows stronger signals overall
As of September 2026, axum shows healthier maintenance signals than rocket. axum rates Healthy overall while rocket rates Mixed. rocket last saw a commit 8 months ago with 26+ active contributors, while axum last saw a commit 1 month ago with 42+ active contributors. Neither has known critical or high-severity CVEs in its dependency tree.
Informational only. RepoPilot summarises public signals at the time of analysis. Not professional, security, or legal advice.
rwf2/rocket
Slowing — last commit 4mo ago
license evidence incomplete; dependency CVE scan unavailable
license evidence incomplete
Documented and popular — useful reference codebase to read through.
license evidence incomplete; dependency CVE scan unavailable
- ⚠Slowing — last commit 4mo ago
- ⚠Concentrated ownership — top contributor handles 65% of recent commits
- ✓Last commit 4mo ago
- ✓26+ active contributors
- ✓CI configured
- ✓Tests present
Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests
tokio-rs/axum
Healthy across all four use cases
No blocking maintenance, license, or known-CVE signals were found; still verify the package version and fit.
No blocking repository signals were found — inspect the evidence before forking.
Documented and popular — useful reference codebase to read through.
No blocking repository-level signals were found; deployment review is still required.
- ✓Last commit 1d ago
- ✓42+ active contributors
- ✓Distributed ownership (top contributor 16% of recent commits)
- ✓MIT licensed
- ✓CI configured
- ✓Tests present
Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests, cross-checked against dependency CVEs from deps.dev and OpenSSF Scorecard
Signal-by-signal breakdown
| rocket | axum | |
|---|---|---|
| Stars | 25,734 | 26,922 |
| Last commit | 8mo ago | 1mo ago |
| License | Unknown | MIT |
| Open issues | 80 | 75 |
| Has tests | ✓ | ✓ |
| Has CI | ✓ | ✓ |
| Test coverage | 82% | 100% |
| Dependency CVEs | No CVEs | No CVEs |
| Architecture grade | — | — |
| Cycles | — | — |
| Bottom-line | Mixed signals | Healthy signals |
Want the full analysis? rwf2/rocket · tokio-rs/axum
Ask AI about rwf2/rocket vs tokio-rs/axum
Open the chat with a comparison question pre-filled.