shipapis
StarSubmit an APISubmit API

Hunter vs OpenQR

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

APIHunterHEALTHY96OpenQRHEALTHY80
Uptime · 30d
Uptime · 90d100%100%
Uptime · 30d100%100%
P50 · ms3621125
P95 · ms8592851
AuthapiKeyapiKey
CORSnoyes
HTTPSyesyes
Card requirednono
Commercial useunclearunclear
Data licenseUnverifiedUnverified
Free tierFree tier — key may be requiredFree tier — key may be required
Rate limitUnpublishedUnpublished
In directory since2026-07-052026-07-05
operationalpartialdownno data

Hunter vs OpenQR: common questions

Which is more reliable, Hunter or OpenQR?

Both are neck-and-neck — Hunter and OpenQR 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, Hunter or OpenQR?

Hunter has the lower median latency in our checks — Hunter responds in 362 ms versus OpenQR at 1125 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 Hunter and OpenQR need an API key?

Both ask you to authenticate — Hunter uses an API key and OpenQR uses an API key. Each key is free to obtain; the Auth and Card-required rows above spell out the signup terms.

Can I call Hunter and OpenQR from the browser?

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

Are Hunter and OpenQR free for commercial use?

Hunter has unclear commercial terms, and OpenQR 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.