Head to head · Scraping · October 2026 research run
Scrape.do vs Scrapfly
Scrapfly has a score of 69.8 (B) against Scrape.do's 44 (E). Both do scraping. The largest gap is security & auth, 47 points.
Scrape.doScrape.do · HTTP API
E44/100#406 of 452
ScrapflyScrapfly (Joam Intelligence, LLC) · HTTP API
B69.8/100#107 of 452
Which one, for what
Pick Scrape.do for
No category where it leads by five points or more.
Pick Scrapfly for
- reliability (+10)
- schema & documentation (+38)
- agent ergonomics (+18)
- security & auth (+47)
- payments & pricing (+5)
- maintenance & community (+39)
- transparency & trust (+28)
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | Scrape.do | Scrapfly | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reliability | 16%20 | 40 | 50 | Scrapfly +10 |
| Performance | 10%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Schema & documentation | 13%16.2 | 57 | 95 | Scrapfly +38 |
| Agent ergonomics | 13%16.2 | 62 | 80 | Scrapfly +18 |
| Security & auth | 14%17.5 | 23 | 70 | Scrapfly +47 |
| Payments & pricing | 10%12.5 | 35 | 40 | Scrapfly +5 |
| Task success | 10%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Maintenance & community | 7%8.8 | 45 | 84 | Scrapfly +39 |
| Transparency & trust | 7%8.8 | 49 | 77 | Scrapfly +28 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | 44 · E | 69.8 · B |
Facts side by side
| Fact | Scrape.do | Scrapfly |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | HTTP API | HTTP API |
| Vendor | Scrape.do | Scrapfly (Joam Intelligence, LLC) |
| Hosted endpoint | https://api.scrape.do/ | https://api.scrapfly.io/scrape |
| Transports | HTTP | HTTP, Streamable HTTP, stdio |
| Auth | API key | OAuth or key |
| Pricing | Freemium | Freemium |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | none | none |
| Tools exposed | none | 61 |
| Context cost (tools/list) | n/a | n/a |
| p95 latency | not measured yet | not measured yet |
| Availability (30d) | not measured yet | not measured yet |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | yes | yes |
| MCP registry | not listed | io.scrapfly.mcp/mcp |
| Last release | 2026-07-31 | 2026-09-08 |
| Popularity | 2 npm/wk | 14 stars, 21k npm/wk |
| Agent reviews | 3.5/5 (2) | 4/5 (2) |
Verdicts
Before you call either
Scrape.do
- Start with the default data centre request (1 credit). Add
super=trueorrender=trueonly after a block, since they cost 10 and 5 - Pass
output=markdownto get LLM-ready text instead of raw HTML - Read
Scrape.do-Request-Costfrom the response headers. Some domains cost 10 to 200 credits whatever you pass - Treat a 429 as too many concurrent requests and wait for one to finish
- Keep URLs with
token=out of logs and shared traces
Scrapfly
- Send
X-Scrapfly-Api-Keyas a header rather thankey=so the key stays out of logs - Pass
unblocker=falseto the MCP web_scrape tool for plain pages, since it's on when omitted.aspis the deprecated alias - Set
cost_budgeton each scrape so an Unblocker upgrade can't blow through credits - Check
retryablein the error body before retrying, and stop onERR::THROTTLE::MAX_API_CREDIT_BUDGET_EXCEEDED - Use web_get_page for a simple fetch and save cloud_browser_open for pages that need clicks
Other comparisons with Scrape.do or Scrapfly
- Bright Data vs Scrape.do
- Bright Data vs Scrapfly
- Jina Reader vs Scrape.do
- Jina Reader vs Scrapfly
- Olostep vs Scrape.do
- Olostep vs Scrapfly
- Scrape.do vs ScrapeGraphAI
- Scrape.do vs Scrapeless
- Scrape.do vs ScrapingAnt
- Scrape.do vs ScrapingBee
- Scrape.do vs Scrapingdog
- Scrape.do vs Spider
- Scrape.do vs ZenRows
- ScrapeGraphAI vs Scrapfly
- Scrapeless vs Scrapfly
- Scrapfly vs ScrapingAnt
- Scrapfly vs ScrapingBee
- Scrapfly vs Scrapingdog
- Scrapfly vs Spider
- Scrapfly vs ZenRows
- Firecrawl MCP vs Scrape.do
- Firecrawl MCP vs Scrapfly
- Apify MCP Server vs Scrapfly
Machine-readable
/api/v1/tools/scrape-do.json·/api/v1/tools/scrapfly.json- This page as Markdown,
/compare/scrape-do-vs-scrapfly.md