GoldBean vs JPL Close Approach
Same instrument, two spec sheets — measured, not claimed.
GoldBean vs JPL Close Approach: common questions
Which is more reliable, GoldBean or JPL Close Approach?
On our scheduled checks, GoldBean leads on measured uptime — GoldBean at 100% versus JPL Close Approach at 98.0% 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, GoldBean or JPL Close Approach?
JPL Close Approach has the lower median latency in our checks — GoldBean responds in 875 ms versus JPL Close Approach at 676 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 GoldBean and JPL Close Approach need an API key?
JPL Close Approach needs no key, while GoldBean requires a free API key. If you want to start calling without signup, reach for JPL Close Approach first.
Can I call GoldBean and JPL Close Approach from the browser?
Only GoldBean is browser-friendly — it returns CORS headers over HTTPS. JPL Close Approach needs a server-side call or proxy, so factor that into which one fits a front-end project.
Are GoldBean and JPL Close Approach free for commercial use?
GoldBean has unclear commercial terms, and JPL Close Approach 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.