TinyFishvsFirecrawl

TinyFish returns 90% signal. Firecrawl returns 62%.

TinyFish returns clean, usable content from any page. Not chrome and ads. Search and Fetch are free.

Trusted by
GoogleDoorDashAmazon
Capabilities

How they compare.

TinyFishHead to headFirecrawl
Median signal ratio
TinyFish
90.5%
Firecrawl
61.7%
Fetch coverage
TinyFish
93%
Firecrawl
62%
News publishers
TinyFish
15/15
Firecrawl
4/15
Single-article signal
TinyFish
86.7%
Firecrawl
19.3%
Capability
TinyFish
Firecrawl
Search API
Free
Credit-based
Fetch API
Free
Credit-based
Web Agent
Available
Interact
Stealth Browser
Available
Credential Vault
Available
Failed requests
$0
How we tested

Benchmarks, not adjectives.

Every number on this page comes from a reproducible test. Same inputs, every provider, scored the same way.

01

Search quality

A 250-question sample from OpenAI SimpleQA measured first-result correctness and end-to-end answer rate over the top 10 results.

02

Production latency

A 1,200-query latency sample compared p50, p99, worst-case timing, and request errors for synchronous search calls.

03

Fetch coverage

A 45-URL benchmark across common web pages and major news publishers measured usable content coverage and content-to-noise signal.

Fetch

TinyFish fetch returns cleaner content than Firecrawl.

Every token your agent fetches lands in your LLM's context window. Junk tokens hit you twice: higher inference costs and degraded output quality because your agent is reasoning over page chrome instead of actual content.

TinyFish coverage
93%
42 / 45 URLs returned usable content
+31 points
Firecrawl coverage
62%
28 / 45 URLs · fails on 17
Median signal ratio · 45-URL benchmark

TinyFish delivers 90% content. Firecrawl delivers 62%. That means nearly 40% of every page your agent processes is noise.

TinyFish
90.5%
vs
Firecrawl
61.7%
Article signal
Content ratio — what your agent actually gets
TinyFish
86.7%
Clean article text, ready for an LLM
Firecrawl
19.3%
Article buried in 36x more navigation, ads, and page chrome

News is where it breaks.

Across 15 news articles from five publishers, Firecrawl returns usable content for only 4. The rest are blocked or return pages where less than 30% of the output is actual content.

TinyFish15/15
Firecrawl4/15
Search

TinyFish search beats Firecrawl on accuracy and speed.

Many teams use the same provider for search and fetch. If yours does, the quality gap is significant.

SimpleQA · 250 questions
Top-result accuracy · Snippet@1
TinyFish
49.2%
Firecrawl
38.4%
+10.8 ptsTinyFish leads top-result accuracy: 49.2% vs 38.4%.
SimpleQA · 250 questions
End-to-end answer rate · E2E@10
TinyFish
86.8%
Firecrawl
80.0%
+6.8 ptsTinyFish answers 86.8% end-to-end vs 80.0%.
1,200-query production latency sample · lower is better
p50 latency
TinyFish
556 ms
Firecrawl
869 ms
p99 latency
TinyFish
1,347 ms
Firecrawl
2,127 ms
0 vs 2 errorsTinyFish logged 0 errors across 1,200 queries; Firecrawl logged 2.
The full stack

TinyFish adds the agent stack Firecrawl lacks.

Firecrawl's Interact endpoint handles basic click-and-fill on a single page. For anything more complex, you need a different tool. TinyFish was built for the workflows that come after reading.

Web Agent

Multi-page navigation, form filling, authentication through login walls, and structured JSON output. 89.9% on Mind2Web.

✓ TinyFishFirecrawl: Interact: basic click/fill

Stealth Browser

Raw CDP control with engine-level anti-bot protection. Not header spoofing: the kind of stealth that gets past protections Firecrawl's scraper cannot attempt.

✓ TinyFishFirecrawl: Not available

Credential Vault

Secure authentication so your agent accesses gated content without exposing passwords.

✓ TinyFishFirecrawl: Not available
Pricing

Search and Fetch are free.

 
TinyFish
Firecrawl
Search
Free
Credit-based
Fetch
Free
Credit-based
Web Agent
$0.015 / stepLLM included
Stealth Browser
$0.015 / 4 min
Free tier
500 credits + unlimited Search & Fetch
1,000 pages
Failed requests
$0
Credit consumed

For agent workloads where most calls are search and fetch, TinyFish is dramatically cheaper because those calls are free.

TinyFish / mo
$0
vs
Firecrawl / mo
Credit-based
FAQ

Common questions.

On a 45-URL benchmark judged by Claude Sonnet 4, TinyFish returns 90.5% content vs Firecrawl's 61.7%. TinyFish also reaches 42/45 pages vs Firecrawl's 28/45.

On a 250-question sample from OpenAI's SimpleQA benchmark, TinyFish's first result is correct 49.2% of the time vs Firecrawl's 38.4%. TinyFish is also about 1.6x faster: 556ms vs 869ms at p50.

Firecrawl offers Interact for basic click-and-fill actions on a single page. TinyFish's Web Agent does multi-page navigation, form filling, authentication through login walls, and structured JSON output.

TinyFish Search and Fetch are free. Firecrawl charges credits for search, scrape, and crawl. For agent workloads where most calls are search and fetch, TinyFish is dramatically cheaper.

Usually one of two things: the publisher blocks it outright, or Firecrawl returns the page with the article buried inside navigation menus and ad placeholders. TinyFish renders the page in a real browser and strips the chrome.

Give your agent clean context.

Start freeTalk to sales