# Jotform vs Typeform (slim)

> Typeform scores 58.4 (C) on agent readiness against Jotform's 52.9 (D), and leads in 4 of 7 scored categories. Jotform leads on reliability. Both do forms create. Category scores, facts, verdicts and agent notes side by side.

- Full: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/jotform-vs-typeform.md (~1,900 tokens) · this version ~630 tokens · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/jotform-vs-typeform.json · canonical https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/jotform-vs-typeform
- Index: https://www.anchorterminal.com/llms.txt · API: https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/index.json · Updated: 2026-10-08

Typeform scores 58.4 (C) on agent readiness against Jotform's 52.9 (D), and leads in 4 of 7 scored categories. Jotform leads on reliability. Both do forms create.

- Jotform: D 52.9, rank #489 of 629 · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/jotform.min.md
- Typeform: C 58.4, rank #401 of 629 · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/typeform.min.md
- Jotform, good for An owner who already keeps forms in Jotform and wants an agent to build forms, read submissions and register webhooks, including EU and HIPAA accounts on their own hosts. Ahead on Reliability, 83 against 60.
- Typeform, good for Teams already on Typeform who want an agent to draft, edit and publish forms and summarise answers. Ahead on Schema & documentation, 63 against 30; Maintenance & community, 71 against 25.

| Category | Jotform | Typeform |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Reliability (16%) | 83 | 60 |
| Performance (10%) | pending | pending |
| Schema & documentation (13%) | 30 | 63 |
| Agent ergonomics (13%) | 60 | 63 |
| Security & auth (14%) | 56 | 56 |
| Payments & pricing (10%) | 30 | 30 |
| Task success (10%) | pending | pending |
| Maintenance & community (7%) | 25 | 71 |
| Transparency & trust (7%) | 68 | 70 |

| Fact (where they differ) | Jotform | Typeform |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Vendor | Jotform Inc. | Typeform SL |
| Hosted endpoint | `https://api.jotform.com` | `https://api.typeform.com` |
| Licence | Proprietary service under Jotform's terms of use. The MCP server repository (docs and a Gemini CLI extension, no server code) and the Node client are MIT | Proprietary service under Typeform's Service Terms and Developer Terms. The JavaScript API client and the Embed SDK on GitHub are MIT |
| Tools exposed | 6 | 67 |
| llms.txt | no | yes |
| MCP registry | `com.jotform/mcp` | `com.typeform/typeform` |
| Last release | 2026-02-26 | 2026-09-23 |
| Terms last updated | no date given | 2024-04-21 |
| Privacy policy last updated | no date given | 2024-03-14 |
| Terms restrict benchmarking | not found in the text | yes |
| Terms or service can change without notice | yes | not found in the text |
| Popularity | 3.6k npm/wk | 85 stars, 31k npm/wk |