// what is this

The quiet part of open source

GitHub Trending shows you what's popular. SilentStars shows you what's worth watching.

// the problem

Stars are a popularity signal, not a quality signal. A project can have 12 stars and ship daily. Another can have 50k stars and be effectively abandoned. GitHub Trending, Hacker News, and most discovery tools reward hype — not craft.

Thousands of maintainers build quietly: consistent commits, closed issues, steady releases. No launch. No Product Hunt. No Twitter thread. Just code.

// how it works

Every night, SilentStars collects data from GitHub and computes two scores per project:

  • Undervalued Score — activity divided by visibility. High commits, low stars = undervalued.
  • Health Score — weighted combination of commit recency, cadence, issue resolution, and PR activity.

Projects are classified as Thriving, Newborn, Quiet, At Risk, Watched, Revived, or Archived. On top of that, each project receives behavioral tags — signals like solo_builder, hidden_gem, fork_magnet, or funded — that drive the home page sections. No editorial bias. Pure signal.

→ See all projects

// who runs this

SilentStars is built and maintained by capuz. It runs on GitHub Pages with zero backend — nightly GitHub Actions collect data, Astro builds the static site.

The Bluesky bot @silentstars-radar.bsky.social posts one undervalued project daily.

If SilentStars surfaces a project that changes how you work or think about open source, consider supporting it. Zero cost. Zero backend. Built with care.

// contribute

Know a project that deserves to be tracked? Submit it — projects are reviewed and added manually within 48h.

Submit a project →

// stay in the loop

The Undervalued Score +

How much a project earns versus how much attention it actually gets. Above 50 means the work is outrunning its audience. Recomputed nightly from commit velocity, contributor effort, issue resolution, fork utility, release cadence, and project maturity — divided by a logarithmic reach factor.

score  = signal / reach

signal = 0.25·commit_velocity   // commits in last 90 days (cap 30)
       + 0.20·contributor_work  // unique authors × velocity (cap 100)
       + 0.20·issue_resolution  // closed ÷ total issues
       + 0.20·fork_ratio        // forks ÷ stars (proxy for real usage)
       + 0.10·release_cadence   // releases in 90 days (cap 3)
       + age_bonus              // +0 to +0.30 after 6 months
       + homepage_bonus         // +0.05 if homepage is set

reach  = log₁₀(stars + watchers + 10)
The Health Score +

Is the project alive and maintained right now? A 0–100 pulse recomputed nightly from commit recency, rhythm, how fast issues close, and how quickly PRs get merged.

health = 0.35·recency       // days since last commit (90d decay)
       + 0.25·cadence       // commit rhythm consistency
       + 0.20·issue_health  // closed ÷ total issues
       + 0.20·pr_health     // merged ÷ total PRs
Health bands +

The colour and label on every card come straight from the health score.

Healthy   80 – 100   active, responsive, regular releases
Stable    60 – 79    maintained, steady, no alarms
Quiet     40 – 59    slowing down — watch this one
At Risk    0 – 39    going dark · candidate for rescue
// Tags — what each label means +

Tags are independent behavioral signals computed nightly. A project can hold multiple at once. They drive the home page sections.

solo_builder      one person holds > 80% of commits (last 180d)
needs_contributors has open "help wanted" or "good first issue" labels
hidden_gem        < 100 stars · active in last 3 months · documented
legacy_hero       repo > 5 years old · committed this year
fork_magnet       forks/stars > 0.5 · used as template or dependency
release_machine   5+ releases in the last 90 days
under_pressure    > 10 open issues · ≤ 2 contributors · health ≥ 60
community_watch   watchers > stars · devs tracking before the public
community_hub     GitHub Discussions enabled · > 20 discussions
funded            maintainer has active funding channel
Why rank against stars at all? +

Stars are an outcome, not effort. A project with 8 stars and daily commits is doing more interesting work than one coasting on 8k. We measure the building, then divide by the attention already received — so the genuinely undervalued rise to the top.

// stars   = lagging indicator
// commits = leading indicator
// we rank by the leading one