Head to head · Identity verification · October 2026 research run
Alloy vs Entrust Identity Verification (formerly Onfido)
Entrust Identity Verification (formerly Onfido) scores 62.1 (B) on agent readiness against Alloy's 52.4 (D), and leads in 6 of 7 scored categories. Alloy leads on maintenance & community. Both do identity verification.
Best identity and business verification APIs for AI agents · All 119 verification comparisons
Which one, for what
Alloy D
Best for Banks and fintechs that already run onboarding through Alloy and want an agent to submit journey applications, read decisions and work investigations.
Ahead on
- Maintenance & community, 72 against 58
Watch for
No public prices, trial or self-serve sign-up. Access starts with a demo request
Entrust Identity Verification (formerly Onfido) B
Best for A company already contracted with Entrust that wants an agent to create applicants, start workflow runs and read reports through typed libraries and a public spec.
Ahead on
- Reliability, 70 against 59
- Schema & documentation, 84 against 73
- Agent ergonomics, 65 against 52
- Security & auth, 58 against 49
- Payments & pricing, 20 against 0
- Transparency & trust, 70 against 62
Watch for
entrust.com answered 403 to every request, so the terms, privacy notice, pricing page and security.txt weren't read
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | Alloy | Entrust Identity Verification (formerly Onfido) | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reliability | 16%20 | 59 | 70 | Entrust Identity Verification (formerly Onfido) +11 |
| Performance | 10%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Schema & documentation | 13%16.2 | 73 | 84 | Entrust Identity Verification (formerly Onfido) +11 |
| Agent ergonomics | 13%16.2 | 52 | 65 | Entrust Identity Verification (formerly Onfido) +13 |
| Security & auth | 14%17.5 | 49 | 58 | Entrust Identity Verification (formerly Onfido) +9 |
| Payments & pricing | 10%12.5 | 0 | 20 | Entrust Identity Verification (formerly Onfido) +20 |
| Task success | 10%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Maintenance & community | 7%8.8 | 72 | 58 | Alloy +14 |
| Transparency & trust | 7%8.8 | 62 | 70 | Entrust Identity Verification (formerly Onfido) +8 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | D 52.4/100 | B 62.1/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | Alloy | Entrust Identity Verification (formerly Onfido) |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | HTTP API | HTTP API |
| Vendor | First Mile Group, Inc. (Alloy) | Onfido Ltd (Entrust) |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | HTTP | HTTP |
| Auth | OAuth or key | OAuth or key |
| Pricing | Paid | Paid |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | Proprietary service under Alloy's terms of service. The @alloyidentity/web-sdk capture package is MIT | Proprietary service under Entrust's terms. The OpenAPI spec and the server libraries (onfido-java, onfido-node, onfido-php, onfido-python, onfido-ruby) are MIT |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | yes | yes |
| Last release | 2026-10-05 | 2026-08-31 |
| Terms last updated | 2026-03-12 | couldn't be read |
| Privacy policy last updated | no date given | |
| Customer content may train models | not found in the text | couldn't be read |
| Terms restrict automated access | yes | couldn't be read |
| Terms restrict benchmarking | not found in the text | couldn't be read |
| Terms or service can change without notice | not found in the text | couldn't be read |
| Arbitration or class-action waiver | yes | couldn't be read |
| Popularity | 21k npm/wk | 59k npm/wk, 27k PyPI/wk |
Verdicts
Alloy
Alloy's public docs cover journeys, evaluations, entities, documents, cases and investigations, with llms.txt, Markdown pages, OpenAPI fragments and rate-limit headers with retry-after. Access is sales-led with no public price or trial, credentials have no scopes, there is no idempotency key or server SDK, and inputs vary by each customer's workflow.
Entrust Identity Verification (formerly Onfido)
The v3.6 API has a public MIT OpenAPI file, server libraries in five languages, OAuth client credentials with scopes and an 18-month deprecation notice. Entrust's own site answered 403, so terms, privacy notice, pricing and security.txt weren't read. There is no idempotency key, and live tokens need a Dashboard account with billing details.
Before you call either
Alloy
- Get the account's base URL from the customer. Defaults are api.alloy.co and sandbox.alloy.co, and some accounts have their own hosts
- Use unique, prefixed external IDs in sandbox. Sandbox and Production share one data store
- Read
alloy-ratelimit-remaining, and on 429 or 5xx wait forretry-afterwith exponential backoff and jitter - Expect
runningafter about 25 seconds on journey applications and wait for the webhook instead of resubmitting - Send the workflow header with account-level keys, since inputs depend on the workflow configured
Entrust Identity Verification (formerly Onfido)
- Use the regional host for the account (api.eu, api.us or api.ca.onfido.com/v3.6). v3.6 has no default region
- Prefer an OAuth client with only the scopes the task needs over a live API token, and refresh the 60-minute access token
- Stay under 400 requests a minute live and 120 in sandbox, and back off on a 429
rate_limiterror - Check before retrying a POST. There is no idempotency key, so a retry can create a second applicant or check
- Treat webhook events as duplicates or out of order, and verify
X-SHA2-Signatureover the raw body
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, Alloy or Entrust Identity Verification (formerly Onfido)?
Entrust Identity Verification (formerly Onfido) scores 62.1 (B) on agent readiness against Alloy's 52.4 (D), and leads in 6 of 7 scored categories. Alloy leads on maintenance & community.
Do Alloy and Entrust Identity Verification (formerly Onfido) need an API key?
Both take an API key or an OAuth sign-in.
Can an agent call Alloy and Entrust Identity Verification (formerly Onfido) without installing anything?
No hosted endpoint is listed for Alloy. No hosted endpoint is listed for Entrust Identity Verification (formerly Onfido).
Other comparisons with Alloy or Entrust Identity Verification (formerly Onfido)
- Alloy vs ComplyCube
- Alloy vs Didit
- Alloy vs Jumio
- Alloy vs Middesk
- Alloy vs Persona
- Alloy vs Plaid Identity Verification
- Alloy vs Shufti
- Alloy vs Socure RiskOS
- Alloy vs Stripe Identity
- Alloy vs Sumsub
- Alloy vs Trulioo
- Alloy vs Veriff
- Alloy vs Vouched
- ComplyCube vs Entrust Identity Verification (formerly Onfido)
- Didit vs Entrust Identity Verification (formerly Onfido)
- Entrust Identity Verification (formerly Onfido) vs Jumio
- Entrust Identity Verification (formerly Onfido) vs Middesk
- Entrust Identity Verification (formerly Onfido) vs Persona
- Entrust Identity Verification (formerly Onfido) vs Plaid Identity Verification
- Entrust Identity Verification (formerly Onfido) vs Shufti
- Entrust Identity Verification (formerly Onfido) vs Socure RiskOS
- Entrust Identity Verification (formerly Onfido) vs Stripe Identity
- Entrust Identity Verification (formerly Onfido) vs Sumsub
- Entrust Identity Verification (formerly Onfido) vs Trulioo
- Entrust Identity Verification (formerly Onfido) vs Veriff
- Entrust Identity Verification (formerly Onfido) vs Vouched
- Alloy vs ComplyAdvantage
- ComplyAdvantage vs Entrust Identity Verification (formerly Onfido)
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/alloy-vs-entrust-identity-verification.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/alloy.json·/api/v1/tools/entrust-identity-verification.json - From a terminal
anchor compare alloy entrust-identity-verification(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "alloy", "b": "entrust-identity-verification"}at/mcp, no key