# Amazon Transcribe vs Gladia Speech-to-Text API + MCP (slim)

> Amazon Transcribe has a score of 73.6 (BB) against Gladia Speech-to-Text API + MCP's 69.7 (B). Both do speech stt. The largest gap is maintenance & community, 45 points. Category scores, facts, verdicts and agent notes side by side.

- Full: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/amazon-transcribe-vs-gladia-stt.md (~1,800 tokens) · this version ~380 tokens · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/amazon-transcribe-vs-gladia-stt.json · canonical https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/amazon-transcribe-vs-gladia-stt
- Index: https://www.anchorterminal.com/llms.txt · API: https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/index.json · Updated: 2026-10-05

Amazon Transcribe has a score of 73.6 (BB) against Gladia Speech-to-Text API + MCP's 69.7 (B). Both do speech stt. The largest gap is maintenance & community, 45 points.

- Amazon Transcribe: BB 73.6, rank #57 of 452 · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/amazon-transcribe.min.md
- Gladia Speech-to-Text API + MCP: B 69.7, rank #108 of 452 · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/gladia-stt.min.md
- Pick Amazon Transcribe for reliability (+35), agent ergonomics (+5), security & auth (+10), transparency & trust (+19). Pick Gladia Speech-to-Text API + MCP for schema & documentation (+5), payments & pricing (+20), maintenance & community (+45).

| Category | Amazon Transcribe | Gladia Speech-to-Text API + MCP |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Reliability (16%) | 95 | 60 |
| Performance (10%) | pending | pending |
| Schema & documentation (13%) | 90 | 95 |
| Agent ergonomics (13%) | 80 | 75 |
| Security & auth (14%) | 80 | 70 |
| Payments & pricing (10%) | 20 | 40 |
| Task success (10%) | pending | pending |
| Maintenance & community (7%) | 35 | 80 |
| Transparency & trust (7%) | 85 | 66 |