NewLaunching String Web Access APIRead the manifesto →
← Comparisons

String vs ScraperAPI (2026): 99 sites compared

Logan Harless, Founder, String · Updated August 31, 2026

String is the better fit when protected pages must return consistently without choosing a stronger mode first. ScraperAPI is the better fit for high-volume, cooperative pages where its one-credit request stays one credit. In the August 2026 Web Data Frontier Benchmark, String returned verified content on 97.0% of 495 requests. ScraperAPI's default request returned it on 64.2%.

ScraperAPI still wins meaningful cases. It cleared Coupang on all five attempts against String's four, returned Skyscanner once where String returned nothing, and posted 85.0% against Akamai. Its Startup plan supplies 1,000,000 credits for $149, making cooperative pages cheaper at volume than String's subscription-plus-usage price. The choice depends on the domains and ScraperAPI modes the workload actually needs.

Last updated August 31, 2026. Benchmark figures come from the August 11, 2026 run. ScraperAPI product, pricing, credit, parameter, failure-billing, cost-control, and MCP claims were checked against its published pricing page, credit documentation, parameter documentation, status-code documentation, and MCP documentation on August 31, 2026.

TL;DR

  • String passed 480 of 495 benchmark requests, or 97.0%. ScraperAPI passed 318, or 64.2%.
  • String's failure-aware latency score was 9.98 seconds, second of 15 providers. ScraperAPI's was 13.65 seconds, fifth.
  • ScraperAPI returned nothing on all five attempts for 29 of 99 sites. String did so for two.
  • The benchmark tested ScraperAPI's default one-credit request. It did not test premium, render, or ultra_premium modes.
  • ScraperAPI costs one credit for a normal page, 5 for Amazon, 25 for Google or Bing, and 30 for LinkedIn. A bypass for Cloudflare, DataDome, or PerimeterX adds 10 credits.
  • Rendering or premium proxies cost 10 credits, premium plus rendering costs 25, ultra-premium costs 30, and ultra-premium plus rendering costs 75.
  • ScraperAPI's 85.0% Akamai result was strong, and it beat String on Coupang and Skyscanner.
  • ScraperAPI bills responses with status 200 or 404. A CAPTCHA page returned as 200 can consume credits even though the benchmark rejects it as unusable.
  • String bills only requests that return verified content. It automatically selects the fetch and proxy path.
  • Both providers publish hosted MCP servers.
String ScraperAPI
Product shape One fetch API, plus search, sitemap crawling, remote Chrome, and MCP Scraping API with proxy rotation, retries, rendering, geotargeting, data pipelines, a crawler, and MCP
Benchmark path String selects the request or browser path URL and API key, no premium or rendering flag
Benchmark success 97.0% (480/495) 64.2% (318/495)
Failure-aware latency score 9.98s, second of 15 13.65s, fifth of 15
Sites passed on no attempts 2 of 99 29 of 99
Entry offer 5,000 free requests; Starter $20 plus usage 1,000 free monthly credits; 7-day trial with 5,000
Roughly $100 tier Growth $100 plus $0.20 to $4.00 per 1,000 verified requests No $100 plan; Hobby $49 for 100,000 credits, Startup $149 for 1,000,000
Cost control Published rates by path; blocked requests free max_cost limit and domain-cost estimator
Best fit Protected pages that must return consistently Cooperative, predictable pages at high volume

String vs ScraperAPI benchmark results

The Web Data Frontier Benchmark sends every provider the same 99 URLs five times. A response passes only when it contains a marker from the real page. A CAPTCHA or block page returning HTTP 200 still fails. The August run made 7,425 live requests across 15 providers.

String built the benchmark and sells the product that ranked first. The test is public so that conflict is inspectable: the target list and pass criteria, ScraperAPI adapter, and complete results JSON are available for review.

Provider Successful requests Success rate Latency score
String 480/495 97.0% 9.98s
ScraperAPI 318/495 64.2% 13.65s

The latency score is failure-aware. For each target it takes the p75 of successful attempts; a provider that never returns the page inherits the p75 of providers that did. That prevents a fast block page from looking like good performance.

Accuracy against latency. Accuracy is the percent of requests that returned verified content; latency is the failure-aware mean per-target p75, in seconds. Web Data Frontier Benchmark · 99 targets · 495 requests per provider · August 11, 2026. Live leaderboard

The benchmark tested ScraperAPI's default path

The ScraperAPI adapter sends a URL and API key. It does not set premium=true, render=true, or ultra_premium=true. That is ScraperAPI's normal one-credit request and the experience a customer gets before selecting a stronger path.

ScraperAPI's parameter reference exposes those stronger paths explicitly. Premium proxies or rendering each cost 10 credits. Premium plus rendering costs 25, ultra-premium costs 30, and ultra-premium plus rendering costs 75. Those modes could clear pages the default request missed. They are also different configurations with different economics.

The 64.2% result is therefore not a claim about every ScraperAPI mode's ceiling. It is the measured result for the default path. String makes a different product choice: one endpoint selects the request, browser, standard-proxy, or premium-proxy path automatically and bills the path used.

Where the 33-point success gap appears

ScraperAPI returned nothing on all five attempts for 29 sites: Etsy, Instagram, Facebook, X, Stack Overflow, Best Buy, Booking.com, Tripadvisor, Zara, Ralph Lauren, StockX, Foot Locker, G2, Crunchbase, Trustpilot, Realtor.com, Idealista, Safeway, AutoZone, Hyatt, Carter's, Canada Goose, Neiman Marcus, Cars.com, Yellow Pages, Leboncoin, Allegro, AXS, and Temu.

String returned content on 28 of those 29. It passed all five attempts on 25 and four of five on Neiman Marcus, Allegro, and Booking.com. Temu shut out every provider in the run.

ScraperAPI also won two targets. It cleared Coupang on five attempts against String's four and returned Skyscanner once against String's zero. ScraperAPI's target-level wins belong in the buying decision, not under the aggregate.

Anti-bot systems

Anti-bot system String ScraperAPI
Cloudflare 100% 60%
Akamai 98% 85%
DataDome 98% 55%
PerimeterX 89% 58%
Kasada 100% 0%

Akamai was ScraperAPI's strongest named anti-bot category. It passed 85.0% of requests across 20 Akamai targets, second to String's 98.0% and ahead of every other provider highlighted in the existing ScraperAPI alternatives comparison. Its largest gap was Kasada, where all 15 attempts failed.

Across eight social platforms, ScraperAPI passed 25 of 40 attempts. LinkedIn, Reddit, TikTok, YouTube, and Pinterest were perfect; Instagram, Facebook, and X returned nothing. String passed all 40.

What each product is

ScraperAPI wraps proxy rotation, CAPTCHA and ban detection, retries, geotargeting, rendering, and domain-specific logic behind an HTTP API and proxy endpoint. Its current plans include full crawler access, and its DataPipeline schedules and exports larger jobs.

The knobs are part of the product. ScraperAPI lets a buyer choose rendering, premium or ultra-premium routing, sessions, country, device, and a per-request cost ceiling. The max_cost parameter rejects a request before it exceeds the specified credit limit, and the URL-cost endpoint shows a domain and configuration's expected weight.

String is narrower. Send a URL to the Web Access API and get Markdown, HTML, or JSON. Proxy rotation, fingerprinting, CAPTCHA solving, and browser escalation happen behind the endpoint. String also provides search, an asynchronous sitemap crawl, remote Chrome over CDP, and a hosted MCP server.

Both providers support agent integrations. String is in the official registry as ai.usestring/web-access. ScraperAPI publishes a hosted MCP server and documents render, premium, ultra_premium, country, and device controls in its MCP quickstart. ScraperAPI offers more explicit controls; String gives the agent fewer choices to get wrong.

Pricing: credits and multipliers versus verified requests

ScraperAPI pricing starts at Hobby for $49 per month with 100,000 credits, Startup for $149 with 1,000,000, and Business for $299 with 3,000,000. Unused credits reset at renewal.

The per-request weight depends on the domain and parameters:

ScraperAPI request Credits Cost per 1,000 on Hobby Cost per 1,000 on Startup
Normal page 1 $0.49 $0.15
Amazon 5 $2.45 $0.75
Cloudflare, DataDome, or PerimeterX bypass 11 $5.39 $1.64
Google or Bing 25 $12.25 $3.73
LinkedIn 30 $14.70 $4.47
Ultra-premium with rendering 75 $36.75 $11.18

The 11-credit row combines the normal one-credit request with the 10-credit bypass addition described in ScraperAPI's pricing FAQ. Forty-three of the benchmark's 99 targets sit behind Cloudflare, DataDome, or PerimeterX, so the domain multiplier is material for this workload.

ScraperAPI charges status 200 and 404 responses. A direct 500 failure after its retry window is free. A CAPTCHA response can still arrive with status 200, consume credits, and fail the benchmark because the requested content is absent. ScraperAPI's docs ask customers to report those pages so its detection database can be updated.

String charges a subscription plus requests that return verified content. The first 5,000 requests are free. Starter is $20 per month and Growth is $100. Growth rates are:

Fetch path Price per 1,000 verified requests
Request, standard proxy $0.20
Browser, standard proxy $1.00
Request, premium proxy $2.00
Browser, premium proxy $4.00

The honest price comparison runs both ways. ScraperAPI Startup is cheaper for one-credit pages at volume, and its 11-credit protected-page rate of about $1.64 per 1,000 is below String's $2.00 premium-request usage rate before String's subscription. ScraperAPI's Google, LinkedIn, and rendered ultra-premium weights are more expensive than String's highest Growth rate. String rolls credits over and never bills a blocked request; ScraperAPI credits reset monthly and a 200 block page may bill.

Do not divide String's success-billed rate by benchmark success. A blocked request costs String nothing. ScraperAPI's cost per usable page does depend on whether an unusable body came back with billable status 200, which the published benchmark results do not classify by response status. The broader 13-provider pricing comparison keeps known billing facts separate from unknowns.

Where ScraperAPI is the better choice

  • Your targets are cooperative, predictable, and stay on the one-credit default path.
  • You consume enough Startup or Business credits each month to reach their lower unit rates.
  • Akamai protects much of the target list.
  • Coupang or Skyscanner matters more than the aggregate benchmark.
  • You want explicit rendering, proxy, location, device, session, and cost controls.
  • You want a hosted MCP server but prefer the model to choose request parameters.

Where String is the better choice

  • A fixed list of protected pages must return consistently through one endpoint.
  • Your targets resemble ScraperAPI's retail, travel, social, review, or real-estate shutouts.
  • Cloudflare, DataDome, PerimeterX, or Kasada protects much of the list.
  • You do not want callers to choose and price stronger modes.
  • You want blocked requests to be unambiguously free and credits to roll over.

Using String and ScraperAPI together

Keep ScraperAPI for cooperative, one-credit pages and send the domains that require repeated flags or still miss through String. The reverse can work too: use String as the protected-page path and ScraperAPI's crawler or DataPipeline for scheduled bulk work.

Both products offer a free evaluation. Test the default and stronger ScraperAPI modes against the same representative URLs before changing production traffic. Use max_cost so the test cannot silently move from one credit to 75.

If ScraperAPI is one option among several, the ScraperAPI alternatives comparison places five substitutes next to the same benchmark.

FAQ

Is String better than ScraperAPI for protected websites?

On the August 2026 Web Data Frontier Benchmark's default paths, yes. String returned verified content on 97.0% of 495 requests and ScraperAPI on 64.2%. ScraperAPI was strong against Akamai and beat String on Coupang and Skyscanner. Its premium, rendering, and ultra-premium modes were not tested.

Is String cheaper than ScraperAPI?

Not always. ScraperAPI Startup's one-credit pages cost about $0.15 per 1,000 when its allowance is fully used, below String Growth's $0.20 usage rate and $100 subscription. ScraperAPI's cost rises with domain and mode: about $1.64 for an 11-credit page, $4.47 for LinkedIn, and $11.18 for ultra-premium rendering. String Growth charges $0.20 to $4.00 per 1,000 verified requests and rolls credits over.

Does ScraperAPI charge for blocked requests?

It charges responses with status 200 or 404 and does not charge a 500 failure after its retry window. A CAPTCHA or block page can return 200 and consume credits, which is why the benchmark validates page content rather than status alone. String bills only when verified content returns.

Did the benchmark test ScraperAPI premium modes?

No. The public adapter sends only the URL and API key. ScraperAPI's stronger modes cost 10 to 75 credits and may clear pages the one-credit default missed. Test them separately and compare their different unit costs.

Which product is faster?

String on the failure-aware benchmark score: 9.98 seconds against ScraperAPI's 13.65. That score includes the cost of targets a provider fails and should not be read as a raw response-time promise for every successful page.

Do String and ScraperAPI have MCP servers?

Yes. String publishes ai.usestring/web-access in the official MCP registry. ScraperAPI publishes a hosted MCP integration whose scrape tool exposes its premium, rendering, geotargeting, and device controls.

When should I stay with ScraperAPI?

Stay when most targets are cooperative one-credit pages, you use the monthly allowance fully, or Akamai-heavy coverage and explicit request controls matter more than the overall pass rate. ScraperAPI also returned Coupang and Skyscanner more reliably than String in this run.

Can I verify these results?

Yes. The benchmark repository, ScraperAPI adapter, and August results file are public. A full run makes thousands of billable requests, so begin with a subset.

Web Scraping API Pricing in 2026: 13 Providers ComparedUpdated August 31, 2026Best ZenRows Alternatives in 2026: 7 Tools ComparedUpdated August 27, 2026Best Bright Data Alternatives in 2026: 7 Tools ComparedUpdated August 27, 2026
Get your API key →Explore the Web Access API
© 2026 StringEU and UK GDPR Article 27 representative — appointment verified by EuverifyBuilt in New York City 🗽 🍎