PhishStats vs SniffCat

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

Uptime · 30d
Uptime · 90d5.9%83.3%
Uptime · 30d1.7%83.3%
P50 · ms240290
P95 · ms352598
AuthnoneapiKey
CORSnono
HTTPSyesyes
Card requirednono
Commercial useunclearyes
Data licenseUnverified
Free tierFree — limits not published
Rate limit20 req/window · 19 remaining · resets 50Retry-After: 24s
In directory since2026-07-052026-08-19
operationalpartialdownno data

PhishStats vs SniffCat: common questions

Which is more reliable, PhishStats or SniffCat?

On our scheduled checks, SniffCat leads on measured uptime — PhishStats at 5.9% versus SniffCat at 83.3% 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, PhishStats or SniffCat?

PhishStats has the lower median latency in our checks — PhishStats responds in 240 ms versus SniffCat at 290 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 PhishStats and SniffCat need an API key?

PhishStats needs no key, while SniffCat requires a free API key. If you want to start calling without signup, reach for PhishStats first.

Can I call PhishStats and SniffCat from the browser?

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

Are PhishStats and SniffCat free for commercial use?

PhishStats has unclear commercial terms, and SniffCat allows commercial use on its free tier. 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.