PotterDB vs Scryfall
Same instrument, two spec sheets — measured, not claimed.
PotterDB vs Scryfall: common questions
Which is more reliable, PotterDB or Scryfall?
On our scheduled checks, PotterDB leads on measured uptime — PotterDB at 100% versus Scryfall at 96.1% 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, PotterDB or Scryfall?
Scryfall has the lower median latency in our checks — PotterDB responds in 525 ms versus Scryfall at 470 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 PotterDB and Scryfall need an API key?
Neither needs a paid key — PotterDB is callable with no signup, and Scryfall is callable with no signup. Both are quick to prototype with; rate limits still apply.
Can I call PotterDB and Scryfall from the browser?
Yes — both PotterDB and Scryfall send CORS headers over HTTPS, so front-end code can fetch either directly with no backend proxy. That makes them easy to swap in a client-side app while you compare responses.
Are PotterDB and Scryfall free for commercial use?
PotterDB has unclear commercial terms, and Scryfall 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.