InScrape
$0.60–$1.20 per 1,000 standard requests
- Entry
- 100 free; $12 for 10,000
- Billing unit
- Successful request
- Non-200 responses
- 0 credits
- Purchased-credit expiry
- Never
Compare · reviewed 20 September 2026
The marketplace is genuinely good at one thing: letting you try several providers before you commit to any of them. It is worth being clear about what you are actually buying while you do that.
Quick verdict
Choose RapidAPI to evaluate several marketplace listings under one account. Choose InScrape when you want one operator, one documented contract and pricing that does not depend on a third-party listing.
Pricing snapshot
Normalize the workload before choosing a lower-looking number. InScrape prices below are for standard one-credit requests; followers and following cost two credits.
InScrape
RapidAPI listings
When RapidAPI listings is the right call
A comparison page that says the competitor is bad at everything is a comparison page nobody believes. Here is where they genuinely win.
Why people switch
These are the four reasons that show up in support conversations, not a marketing list.
A marketplace listing is a wrapper in front of somebody's backend. Nothing on the listing page tells you who runs the scrapers, whether that is a company or one person, or whether three listings you are comparing all resolve to the same upstream. When the data goes wrong, you are debugging a party you cannot identify.
The marketplace supplies auth, billing and a gateway. It does not guarantee the response shape. A listing can rename a field or change a nesting level without notice, and a marketplace-wide status page says nothing about the one endpoint your product calls.
Pricing is set per listing and the units differ — requests, objects, per-endpoint tiers — so comparing two Instagram listings means normalising two billing models before you can tell which is cheaper. Whether 404s and private accounts are charged is set per listing too, and frequently not stated at all.
Questions go into a discussion tab and are answered when the author feels like it. Listings also disappear: an author can unpublish, or stop maintaining and let the endpoint rot. Either way your integration stops and there is no relationship with the operator to fall back on.
Side by side
| InScrape | RapidAPI listings | |
|---|---|---|
| Who operates the scraper | We do, and it is the only product we have | Varies per listing, often not disclosed |
| Response envelope | Identical on all 16 endpoints | Set per listing |
| Billing on private and missing targets | Billed only if scraping used an Instagram or H API resource | Per listing, frequently unstated |
| Request metadata | requested_at, processing_time_ms and query on every success | Rarely consistent |
| Pagination | Cursor pagination on every list endpoint | Per listing |
| Support path | The people who wrote the endpoint | A public discussion thread |
| Provider can vanish overnight | We are the vendor | Listings get unpublished by their authors |
| Trying several vendors on one bill | No | Yes — the actual reason to be there |
FAQ
Some are, and the honest problem is that you cannot tell from the listing page. You are buying a wrapper whose backend is not disclosed, so two listings with different prices and different field names may be one upstream with two markups. Send the same handle to both and compare the payloads before you build on either.
Yes, and most teams do. The move worth making is the endpoint your product depends on, not the whole account.
Both sides are plain REST with a key header, so it is a host swap, a header swap to x-api-key and a one-off field remap. Budget the time for pagination and error handling instead: cursors and error codes are where listings differ most from each other.
Handles can be renamed, deleted or made private. Profile returns 200 with available profile details or data.profile=null for these completed lookups, charged at the endpoint rate. Store the outcome and avoid unnecessary retries.
Compare next
Each page separates billing units, product fit and the cases where the other provider is the better choice.