Anthropic vs Cursor

Anthropic and Cursor both appear on the Smoower Developer Ecosystem Index.

Anthropic (rank #45) holds a modest lead over Cursor (rank #299) on the overall Smoower ecosystem score (63 vs 46). The gap of 17 points reflects composite signals across code, docs, community and reach.

On code quality (the state of repositories, tests, releases and polish), Anthropic is ahead of Cursor. On education (docs, guides and learning material for developers), Anthropic is clearly ahead of Cursor. On community (issue response, PR reviews and discussion health), Anthropic is ahead of Cursor. On reach (how visible the ecosystem is beyond its own repos), Cursor is clearly ahead of Anthropic. On momentum (release cadence and how fast the ecosystem moves), Anthropic is slightly ahead of Cursor.

Anthropic carries 608,522 GitHub stars across 97 public repos, with 45 repositories active in the last 90 days and 736 external contributors on record. Cursor shows 45,548 stars across 11 public repos, 8 active in the last 90 days and 43 external contributors. The star gap on its own does not decide the comparison, but Anthropic's footprint is roughly 13.4x larger, which usually shows up in downstream signals like inbound issues and third party integrations.

Anthropic is the stronger read for anyone weighting education. Cursor looks better where reach is the deciding factor. The table below breaks the scores down pillar by pillar; the linked profiles cover the underlying repos, docs and community signals in full.