InVision vs Perk
Developer ecosystem comparison across GitHub activity, SDKs, documentation, community, reach and momentum.
InVision and Perk (We're fixing business travel.) both appear on the Smoower Developer Ecosystem Index.
Perk (rank #372) holds a narrow lead over InVision (rank #430) on the overall Smoower ecosystem score (42 vs 40). The gap of 2 points reflects composite signals across code, docs, community and reach.
On code quality (the state of repositories, tests, releases and polish), InVision is slightly ahead of Perk. On education (docs, guides and learning material for developers), InVision is clearly ahead of Perk. On community (issue response, PR reviews and discussion health), Perk is clearly ahead of InVision. On reach (how visible the ecosystem is beyond its own repos), InVision is ahead of Perk. On momentum (release cadence and how fast the ecosystem moves), Perk is clearly ahead of InVision.
InVision carries 1,303 GitHub stars across 114 public repos, with 0 repositories active in the last 90 days and 0 external contributors on record. Perk shows 34 stars across 25 public repos, 5 active in the last 90 days and 6 external contributors. The star gap on its own does not decide the comparison, but InVision's footprint is roughly 38.3x larger, which usually shows up in downstream signals like inbound issues and third party integrations.
InVision is the stronger read for anyone weighting education. Perk looks better where momentum 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.
Side-by-side metrics
| Metric | InVision | Perk |
|---|---|---|
| Ranking | ||
| Overall rank | #430 | #372 |
| Pillars | ||
| Overall | 40 | 42 |
| Code | 46 | 44 |
| Education | 80 | 54 |
| Community | 14 | 38 |
| Reach | 40 | 30 |
| Momentum | 0 | 48 |
| Builder experience | 0 | 0 |
| Signals | ||
| Stars | 1,303 | 34 |
| Forks | 193 | 11 |
| Public repos | 114 | 25 |
| Active repos (90d) | 0 | 5 |
| External contributors | 0 | 6 |
| Avg polish | 52 | 33 |
| Avg AI-readiness | 34 | 38 |