shipapis
StarSubmit an APISubmit API

Groq vs JPL Close Approach

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

APIGroqNEW—JPL Close ApproachNEW—
Uptime · 30d
Uptime · 90d—%—%
Uptime · 30d—%—%
P50 · ms——
P95 · ms——
AuthapiKeynone
CORSyesno
HTTPSyesyes
Card requirednono
Commercial useunclearunclear
Data licenseUnverifiedUnverified
Free tierFree tier — API key requiredFree — limits not published
Rate limitUnpublishedUnpublished
In directory since2026-07-052026-07-05
operationalpartialdownno data

Groq vs JPL Close Approach: common questions

Which is more reliable, Groq or JPL Close Approach?

On our scheduled checks, JPL Close Approach leads on measured uptime — Groq at —% versus JPL Close Approach at —% over 90 days. These are our own probe results, not provider claims; the uptime bars above show the day-by-day record for both.

Do Groq and JPL Close Approach need an API key?

JPL Close Approach needs no key, while Groq requires a free API key. If you want to start calling without signup, reach for JPL Close Approach first.

Can I call Groq and JPL Close Approach from the browser?

Only Groq 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 Groq and JPL Close Approach free for commercial use?

Groq 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.