# Fetch (MCP reference server) vs Tavily API + MCP (slim)

> Tavily API + MCP has a score of 77.2 (BB) against Fetch (MCP reference server)'s 57.6 (C). Both do fetching pages. The largest gap is maintenance & community, 43 points. Category scores, facts, verdicts and agent notes side by side.

- Full: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/fetch-reference-server-vs-tavily-mcp.md (~1,700 tokens) · this version ~380 tokens · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/fetch-reference-server-vs-tavily-mcp.json · canonical https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/fetch-reference-server-vs-tavily-mcp
- Index: https://www.anchorterminal.com/llms.txt · API: https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/index.json · Updated: 2026-10-05

Tavily API + MCP has a score of 77.2 (BB) against Fetch (MCP reference server)'s 57.6 (C). Both do fetching pages. The largest gap is maintenance & community, 43 points.

- Fetch (MCP reference server): C 57.6, rank #290 of 452 · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/fetch-reference-server.min.md
- Tavily API + MCP: BB 77.2, rank #20 of 452 · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/tavily-mcp.min.md
- Pick Fetch (MCP reference server) for transparency & trust (+10). Pick Tavily API + MCP for reliability (+37), schema & documentation (+19), security & auth (+22), payments & pricing (+15), maintenance & community (+43).

| Category | Fetch (MCP reference server) | Tavily API + MCP |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Reliability (16%) | 53 | 90 |
| Performance (10%) | pending | pending |
| Schema & documentation (13%) | 70 | 89 |
| Agent ergonomics (13%) | 78 | 81 |
| Security & auth (14%) | 30 | 52 |
| Payments & pricing (10%) | 60 | 75 |
| Task success (10%) | pending | pending |
| Maintenance & community (7%) | 42 | 85 |
| Transparency & trust (7%) | 75 | 65 |