Hunter vs PageBolt

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

Uptime · 30d
Uptime · 90d100%99.02%
Uptime · 30d100%100%
P50 · ms362751
P95 · ms8591432
AuthapiKeyapiKey
CORSnono
HTTPSyesyes
Card requirednono
Commercial useunclearunclear
Data licenseUnverifiedUnverified
Free tierFree tier — key may be requiredFree tier — API key required
Rate limitUnpublishedUnpublished
In directory since2026-07-052026-07-05
operationalpartialdownno data

Hunter vs PageBolt: common questions

Which is more reliable, Hunter or PageBolt?

On our scheduled checks, Hunter leads on measured uptime — Hunter at 100% versus PageBolt at 99.02% 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, Hunter or PageBolt?

Hunter has the lower median latency in our checks — Hunter responds in 362 ms versus PageBolt at 751 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 PageBolt need an API key?

Both ask you to authenticate — Hunter uses an API key and PageBolt 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 PageBolt from the browser?

Neither sends browser-friendly CORS headers reliably, so call Hunter and PageBolt from a server or proxy rather than client-side. The CORS and HTTPS rows above show exactly what we detected for each.

Are Hunter and PageBolt free for commercial use?

Hunter has unclear commercial terms, and PageBolt 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.