Cohesivity vs pg-perf-mcp
Side-by-side comparison
These are alternatives
They are listed in the same category, so they likely cover the same job.
- Choose Cohesivity if you use Codex. It is the only one here that lists it. Based on: Works with.
- Choose pg-perf-mcp if you use Claude Code. It is the only one here that lists it. Based on: Works with.
- Choose Cohesivity if you want the only one whose security scan flagged no issues. Based on: Security scan.
- Choose Cohesivity if you need skills. The others list none. Based on: Skills.
Suggestions use only facts every plugin here reports. They never use Trust Score totals, memberships or paid placement.
Showing 10 of 14 rows that differ.
Show all rows| Plugin | Cohesivity cohesivity/cohesivity | pg-perf-mcp gouranshul/pg-perf |
|---|---|---|
| Works with | Codex, MCP | Claude Code, MCP |
| Trust score | 76/100 | 65/100 |
| Security scan | No issues flagged (90/100, 3 findings) | Caution (59/100, 4 findings) |
| Directory listings | Listed in 1 of 5 checked | Listed in 0 of 5 checked |
| Release integrity | 5.1.0 recorded on 1 channel, no open notices | Not reported |
| Owner verified | Not reported | Yes |
| Skills | 1 | 0 |
| MCP servers | 2 | 1 |
| Version | 5.0.5 | 0.1.0 |
| Developer | Cohesivity | gouranshul |
Facts come from the public registry record. Directory listings count the public directory lists HOL has read; release integrity is what HOL recorded each channel serving. “Not reported” means there is no value yet; it is not treated as no or zero. Paid placement and HOL memberships do not change any value shown here.