PotterDB vs Zelda
Same instrument, two spec sheets — measured, not claimed.
PotterDB vs Zelda: common questions
Which is more reliable, PotterDB or Zelda?
Both are neck-and-neck — PotterDB and Zelda each measure 100% 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, PotterDB or Zelda?
PotterDB has the lower median latency in our checks — PotterDB responds in 525 ms versus Zelda at 903 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.