shipapis
StarSubmit an APISubmit API

JPL Close Approach vs TensorFeed

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

APIJPL Close ApproachUNMONITORED—TensorFeedNEW—
Uptime · 30d
Uptime · 90d—%—%
Uptime · 30d—%—%
P50 · ms——
P95 · ms——
Authnonenone
CORSnoyes
HTTPSyesyes
Card requirednono
Commercial useunclearunclear
Data licenseUnverifiedUnverified
Free tierFree — limits not publishedFree — no key (static JSON feed endpoints)
Rate limitUnpublished120 req/window · 119 remaining · resets 60
In directory since2026-07-052026-07-05
operationalpartialdownno data

JPL Close Approach vs TensorFeed: common questions

Which is more reliable, JPL Close Approach or TensorFeed?

Only TensorFeed is on our probe schedule so far (—% uptime over 90 days). The other is catalogued but not yet live-checked, so we can't compare measured reliability head-to-head — check the uncovered API's own status page for now.

Do JPL Close Approach and TensorFeed need an API key?

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

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

Only TensorFeed 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 TensorFeed free for commercial use?

JPL Close Approach has unclear commercial terms, and TensorFeed 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.