# Firecrawl MCP vs Scrape.do (slim)

> Firecrawl MCP has a score of 75.5 (BB) against Scrape.do's 44 (E). Both do fetching pages. The largest gap is security & auth, 44 points. Category scores, facts, verdicts and agent notes side by side.

- Full: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/firecrawl-mcp-vs-scrape-do.md (~2,000 tokens) · this version ~380 tokens · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/firecrawl-mcp-vs-scrape-do.json · canonical https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/firecrawl-mcp-vs-scrape-do
- Index: https://www.anchorterminal.com/llms.txt · API: https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/index.json · Updated: 2026-10-04

Firecrawl MCP has a score of 75.5 (BB) against Scrape.do's 44 (E). Both do fetching pages. The largest gap is security & auth, 44 points.

- Firecrawl MCP: BB 75.5, rank #34 of 452 · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/firecrawl-mcp.min.md
- Scrape.do: E 44, rank #406 of 452 · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/scrape-do.min.md
- Pick Firecrawl MCP for reliability (+30), schema & documentation (+31), agent ergonomics (+30), security & auth (+44), payments & pricing (+15), maintenance & community (+42), transparency & trust (+27). Pick Scrape.do for nothing in particular.

| Category | Firecrawl MCP | Scrape.do |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Reliability (16%) | 70 | 40 |
| Performance (10%) | pending | pending |
| Schema & documentation (13%) | 88 | 57 |
| Agent ergonomics (13%) | 92 | 62 |
| Security & auth (14%) | 67 | 23 |
| Payments & pricing (10%) | 50 | 35 |
| Task success (10%) | pending | pending |
| Maintenance & community (7%) | 87 | 45 |
| Transparency & trust (7%) | 76 | 49 |