Firecrawl vs Apify
Start with Firecrawl when you need readable content from a page or site. Start with Apify when the job calls for a specific Actor or a custom extractor. Both can crawl websites. The difference is what you choose and maintain. See the recorded two-page Markdown test.
What do you need the scraper to return?
Published by MCP Scraper. The feature table uses vendor documentation. The two-page trial below tests the named tools. A separate Denver search example shows MCP Scraper.
| Job | Firecrawl | Apify |
|---|---|---|
| Read one known page | Send the URL to Scrape and request Markdown or HTML. Check the text against the original page. | Try an Actor built for a known URL, such as Web Fetch. Check the Actor’s output formats before integrating. |
| Collect pages from a site | Start a bounded Crawl. Read the job status, the returned pages, and any errors. | Try Website Content Crawler. Configure the site scope and inspect the resulting text or Markdown. |
| Collect from a named source | Check the relevant endpoint or Alexandria data tool against the fields your application needs. | Select an Actor for the source, such as Google Search Results Scraper, and inspect its input and output schema. |
| Build a custom extractor | Check Scrape’s actions for short interactions. For a session that continues across steps, evaluate Interact and verify the output format you need. | Use a ready-made Actor if it fits, or build your own. Confirm how to start the run and retrieve its output. |
Choosing where browser automation runs? Compare Bright Data and Apify for browser execution.
Still building a shortlist? Compare Firecrawl alternatives by what you need to change.
Product references: Firecrawl Scrape, Interact, Crawl, Alexandria, Apify Web Fetch, Website Content Crawler, Google Search Results Scraper, and Apify Actors.
What Firecrawl and Apify returned on the same two pages
On , we requested Markdown once per tool and page. A result passed if its URL matched the source, its Markdown contained the visible main heading, and the opening passage matched the source page. We allowed a trailing-slash difference in the URL.
| Source page | Firecrawl Scrape | Apify Web Fetch |
|---|---|---|
| Cenco Roofing homepage | Passed. URL, heading and opening passage matched. | Passed. URL, heading and opening passage matched. |
| Plausible Analytics documentation | URL and opening passage matched. The main heading was absent from the Markdown. | Passed. URL, heading and opening passage matched. |
All four requests returned Markdown. On Plausible, Firecrawl returned the page title in metadata. A workflow that needs the visible heading in the Markdown would still have to recover it separately.
We set Firecrawl’s maxAge to 0 and storeInCache to false. Apify used its default fetch settings. The findings apply to the fields returned on these two pages under those settings. Firecrawl reported one credit per response. We did not verify the settled Apify charge.
Inspect the four first-attempt extraction receipts. The summary records the exact settings, expected heading, field checks and reported usage.
To repeat the check, run one public page your workflow actually uses. Save the first response and compare the URL, heading and passage with the source. Choose the fields before you run it and keep retries separate. If cost affects the decision, compare each provider’s settled charge per response that passes the same field check. If no response passes, record the failure and leave the cost per usable response blank. If your next test covers multiple pages, check crawl completeness before accepting the export.
Firecrawl Scrape settings · Firecrawl billing · Apify Web Fetch settings and pricing
Where MCP Scraper fits
Try MCP Scraper when one research task moves between search results, public pages and local reviews. Start with the same question your team needs to answer. Use a compatible AI client or the API, then inspect what came back.
- MCP Scraper returned ten organic results for
roof repair denver. Denver was part of the query. The capture did not verify the search location. - Cenco Roofing appeared at position two. MCP Scraper opened that result and extracted the company’s own description of its services.
Inspect the recorded search · Open the Cenco Roofing source page
This example shows MCP Scraper’s search-to-source workflow. The two-page trial checks single-page Markdown from Firecrawl and Apify.
If you need to reopen the evidence in a later session, save the selected sources in Memory and check what was retained.
See what page extraction adds
See which detail MCP Scraper found on the source page and check what the search snippet left out.