Currents vs Wikipedia REST

Same instrument, two spec sheets — measured, not claimed.

Uptime · 30d
Uptime · 90d100%100%
Uptime · 30d100%100%
P50 · ms58698
P95 · ms1165961
AuthapiKeynone
CORSnoyes
HTTPSyesyes
Card requirednono
Commercial useunclearyes
Data licenseUnverifiedCC BY-SA 4.0
Free tierFree tier — key may be requiredUnlimited within etiquette
Rate limitUnpublished200/sec global courtesy cap
In directory since2026-07-052026-05-09
operationalpartialdownno data

Currents vs Wikipedia REST: common questions

Which is more reliable, Currents or Wikipedia REST?

Both are neck-and-neck — Currents and Wikipedia REST each measure 100% uptime over 90 days on our probe schedule. Reliability here is verified from our own scheduled checks; use the 30-day bars above to see which has been steadier lately.

Which is faster, Currents or Wikipedia REST?

Wikipedia REST has the lower median latency in our checks — Currents responds in 586 ms versus Wikipedia REST at 98 ms (P50). Tail latency (P95) is in the table above; for most workloads the median is the number that shapes how the API feels.

Do Currents and Wikipedia REST need an API key?

Wikipedia REST needs no key, while Currents requires a free API key. If you want to start calling without signup, reach for Wikipedia REST first.

Can I call Currents and Wikipedia REST from the browser?

Only Wikipedia REST is browser-friendly — it returns CORS headers over HTTPS. Currents needs a server-side call or proxy, so factor that into which one fits a front-end project.

Are Currents and Wikipedia REST free for commercial use?

Currents has unclear commercial terms, and Wikipedia REST allows commercial use on its free tier. We track service terms and the data license as separate fields — see the Commercial use and Data license rows above, and confirm both before shipping either in a paid product.