# Exa API + MCP vs Firecrawl MCP (slim)

> Firecrawl MCP has a score of 75.5 (BB) against Exa API + MCP's 66.1 (B). Both do web search. The largest gap is payments & pricing, 40 points. Exa API + MCP accepts x402. Firecrawl MCP doesn't. Category scores, facts, verdicts and agent notes side by side.

- Full: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/exa-mcp-vs-firecrawl-mcp.md (~2,000 tokens) · this version ~330 tokens · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/exa-mcp-vs-firecrawl-mcp.json · canonical https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/exa-mcp-vs-firecrawl-mcp
- Index: https://www.anchorterminal.com/llms.txt · API: https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/index.json · Updated: 2026-10-05

Firecrawl MCP has a score of 75.5 (BB) against Exa API + MCP's 66.1 (B). Both do web search. The largest gap is payments & pricing, 40 points. Exa API + MCP accepts x402. Firecrawl MCP doesn't.

- Exa API + MCP: B 66.1, rank #163 of 452 · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/exa-mcp.min.md
- Firecrawl MCP: BB 75.5, rank #34 of 452 · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/firecrawl-mcp.min.md
- Pick Exa API + MCP for payments & pricing (+40). Pick Firecrawl MCP for security & auth (+24), transparency & trust (+11).

| Category | Exa API + MCP | Firecrawl MCP |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Reliability (16%) | 67 | 70 |
| Performance (10%) | pending | pending |
| Schema & documentation (13%) | 86 | 88 |
| Agent ergonomics (13%) | 96 | 92 |
| Security & auth (14%) | 43 | 67 |
| Payments & pricing (10%) | 90 | 50 |
| Task success (10%) | pending | pending |
| Maintenance & community (7%) | 88 | 87 |
| Transparency & trust (7%) | 65 | 76 |