shipapis
StarSubmit an APISubmit API

JPL Close Approach vs SHARE

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

APIJPL Close ApproachHEALTHY91SHAREHEALTHY96
Uptime · 30d
Uptime · 90d98.9%98.9%
Uptime · 30d96.7%96.6%
P50 · ms553261
P95 · ms17003119
Authnonenone
CORSnoyes
HTTPSyesyes
Card requirednono
Commercial useunclearunclear
Data licenseUnverifiedUnverified
Free tierFree — limits not publishedFree — limits not published
Rate limitUnpublishedUnpublished
In directory since2026-07-052026-07-05
operationalpartialdownno data

JPL Close Approach vs SHARE: common questions

Which is more reliable, JPL Close Approach or SHARE?

Both are neck-and-neck — JPL Close Approach and SHARE each measure 98.9% 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, JPL Close Approach or SHARE?

SHARE has the lower median latency in our checks — JPL Close Approach responds in 553 ms versus SHARE at 261 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 JPL Close Approach and SHARE need an API key?

Neither needs a paid key — JPL Close Approach is callable with no signup, and SHARE is callable with no signup. Both are quick to prototype with; rate limits still apply.

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

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

JPL Close Approach has unclear commercial terms, and SHARE 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.