FakerAPI vs Icanhazip
Same instrument, two spec sheets — measured, not claimed.
FakerAPI vs Icanhazip: common questions
Which is more reliable, FakerAPI or Icanhazip?
On our scheduled checks, Icanhazip leads on measured uptime — FakerAPI at 1.0% versus Icanhazip at 26.5% over 90 days. These are our own probe results, not provider claims; the uptime bars above show the day-by-day record for both.
Which is faster, FakerAPI or Icanhazip?
Icanhazip has the lower median latency in our checks — FakerAPI responds in 860 ms versus Icanhazip at 328 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 FakerAPI and Icanhazip need an API key?
Neither needs a paid key — FakerAPI is callable with no signup, and Icanhazip is callable with no signup. Both are quick to prototype with; rate limits still apply.
Can I call FakerAPI and Icanhazip from the browser?
Only Icanhazip is browser-friendly — it returns CORS headers over HTTPS. FakerAPI needs a server-side call or proxy, so factor that into which one fits a front-end project.
Are FakerAPI and Icanhazip free for commercial use?
FakerAPI has unclear commercial terms, and Icanhazip has unclear commercial terms. 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.