# Emma vs Snoop (slim)

> Snoop scores 26.7 (F) to Emma's 17.4 (F) for subscription tracking. Prices, MCP, x402, uptime and agent notes side by side.

- Full: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/emma-vs-snoop.md (~1,750 tokens) · this version ~480 tokens · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/emma-vs-snoop.json · canonical https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/emma-vs-snoop
- Index: https://www.anchorterminal.com/llms.txt · API: https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/index.json · Updated: 2026-10-14

Snoop scores 26.7 (F) on agent readiness against Emma's 17.4 (F), and leads in 4 of 7 scored categories. Emma leads on schema & documentation. Both do subscription tracking.

- Emma: F 17.4, rank #1044 of 1076 · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/emma.min.md
- Snoop: F 26.7, rank #1027 of 1076 · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/snoop.min.md
- Emma, good for UK users who want subscriptions, bills and budgets in one app, with savings and investing. Ahead on Schema & documentation, 10 against 0.
- Snoop, good for UK users who want bills and subscriptions watched and savings suggested at no cost. Ahead on Reliability, 60 against 15; Security & auth, 6 against 0; Transparency & trust, 58 against 49.

| Category | Emma | Snoop |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Reliability (16%) | 15 | 60 |
| Performance (10%) | pending | pending |
| Schema & documentation (13%) | 10 | 0 |
| Agent ergonomics (13%) | 0 | 0 |
| Security & auth (14%) | 0 | 6 |
| Payments & pricing (10%) | 30 | 30 |
| Task success (10%) | pending | pending |
| Maintenance & community (7%) | 54 | 55 |
| Transparency & trust (7%) | 49 | 58 |

| Fact (where they differ) | Emma | Snoop |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Vendor | Emma Technologies Ltd | Usnoop Limited |
| Licence | Closed service under Emma's terms and conditions (Emma Technologies Ltd) | Closed service under Snoop's terms and conditions (Usnoop Limited) |
| llms.txt | yes | no |
| Last release | 2026-10-12 | 2026-09-30 |
| Terms restrict automated access | yes | not found in the text |