PotterDB vs Zelda
Same instrument, two spec sheets — measured, not claimed.
PotterDB vs Zelda: common questions
Which is more reliable, PotterDB or Zelda?
On our scheduled checks, Zelda leads on measured uptime — PotterDB at 99.44% versus Zelda at 100% 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 Zelda?
PotterDB has the lower median latency in our checks — PotterDB responds in 326 ms versus Zelda at 874 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 Zelda need an API key?
Neither needs a paid key — PotterDB is callable with no signup, and Zelda is callable with no signup. Both are quick to prototype with; rate limits still apply.
Can I call PotterDB and Zelda from the browser?
Yes — both PotterDB and Zelda 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 Zelda free for commercial use?
PotterDB has unclear commercial terms, and Zelda 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.