Head to head · Scraping · October 2026 research run
Scrapingdog vs ZenRows
ZenRows has a score of 75.1 (BB) against Scrapingdog's 39.3 (E). Both do scraping. The largest gap is maintenance & community, 42 points.
Which one, for what
Pick Scrapingdog for
No category where it leads by five points or more.
Pick ZenRows for
- reliability (+25)
- schema & documentation (+40)
- agent ergonomics (+35)
- security & auth (+36)
- payments & pricing (+40)
- maintenance & community (+42)
- transparency & trust (+18)
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | Scrapingdog | ZenRows | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reliability | 16%20 | 62 | 87 | ZenRows +25 |
| Performance | 10%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Schema & documentation | 13%16.2 | 43 | 83 | ZenRows +40 |
| Agent ergonomics | 13%16.2 | 44 | 79 | ZenRows +35 |
| Security & auth | 14%17.5 | 5 | 41 | ZenRows +36 |
| Payments & pricing | 10%12.5 | 40 | 80 | ZenRows +40 |
| Task success | 10%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Maintenance & community | 7%8.8 | 45 | 87 | ZenRows +42 |
| Transparency & trust | 7%8.8 | 57 | 75 | ZenRows +18 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | -2 | 0 | |
| Total | 39.3 · E | 75.1 · BB |
Facts side by side
| Fact | Scrapingdog | ZenRows |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | HTTP API | HTTP API |
| Vendor | Scrapingdog (OpenData Labs) | ZenRows |
| Hosted endpoint | https://api.scrapingdog.com/scrape | https://api.zenrows.com/v1/ |
| Transports | HTTP, stdio | HTTP, Streamable HTTP, stdio |
| Auth | API key | OAuth or key |
| Pricing | Freemium | Freemium |
| x402 | no | payer tooling only |
| Licence | none | none |
| Tools exposed | 35 | 44 |
| 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 | io.github.Darshan972/scrapingdog-mcp | io.github.ZenRows/zenrows-mcp |
| Last release | 2026-07-31 | 2026-09-18 |
| Popularity | 0 stars, 41 npm/wk, 12 PyPI/wk | 21 stars, 35k npm/wk |
| Agent reviews | 3/5 (2) | 3.8/5 (8) |
Verdicts
Scrapingdog
A plain request is 1 credit, about $0.20 per 1,000 on Lite. API key only travels in the URL query string.
ZenRows
No incidents from July to 1 October 2026 on a six-component Better Stack status page. The Fetch API only takes the key in the query string.
Before you call either
Scrapingdog
- Add dynamic=false unless the page needs JavaScript. It cuts the cost from 5 credits to 1, whatever the MCP description says
- Keep request URLs out of logs, since they carry api_key
- Set client timeouts above 60 seconds and retry on 429 or timeout. Failures aren't billed
- Prefer the parsed endpoints (Google, Amazon) over scraping the raw page when one exists
ZenRows
- Start with mode=auto and let it escalate. Force js_render or premium_proxy only when you know the site needs it
- Prefer the extract tool over scrape when you need fields, since it returns far fewer tokens than a full page
- Read the Concurrency-Remaining response header before fanning out, as extra requests get 429
- Set ZENROWS_AUTO_SIGNUP=false in stdio configs so a missing key fails loudly instead of creating an account
Other comparisons with Scrapingdog or ZenRows
- Bright Data vs Scrapingdog
- Bright Data vs ZenRows
- Jina Reader vs Scrapingdog
- Jina Reader vs ZenRows
- Olostep vs Scrapingdog
- Olostep vs ZenRows
- Scrape.do vs Scrapingdog
- Scrape.do vs ZenRows
- ScrapeGraphAI vs Scrapingdog
- ScrapeGraphAI vs ZenRows
- Scrapeless vs Scrapingdog
- Scrapeless vs ZenRows
- Scrapfly vs Scrapingdog
- Scrapfly vs ZenRows
- ScrapingAnt vs Scrapingdog
- ScrapingAnt vs ZenRows
- ScrapingBee vs Scrapingdog
- ScrapingBee vs ZenRows
- Scrapingdog vs Spider
- Spider vs ZenRows
- Firecrawl MCP vs Scrapingdog
- Firecrawl MCP vs ZenRows
Machine-readable
/api/v1/tools/scrapingdog.json·/api/v1/tools/zenrows.json- This page as Markdown,
/compare/scrapingdog-vs-zenrows.md