Side-by-side MCP server comparison
Short answer: it is close. Firecrawl MCP Server scores 95/100 and MCP Server Qdrant scores 92/100 — a 3-point gap, which is inside the noise of a weekly rescore. Firecrawl MCP Server exposes 4 tools against MCP Server Qdrant's 2, so the choice comes down to whether you need that extra surface area or would rather keep your context window small.
Last updated
| Metric | Firecrawl Mcp Server | Mcp Server Qdrant |
|---|---|---|
| MCPpedia Score | 95 | 92 |
| Security Score | 30 | 30 |
| Maintenance Score | 20 | 17 |
| GitHub Stars | 7.3k | 1.5k |
| Weekly Downloads | 50.6k | 7.8k |
| Tools | 4 | 2 |
| Est. Token Cost | 600 | 300 |
| Open CVEs | 0 | 0 |
| Health | Active | Active |
| Auth Required | No | No |
| Transport | stdio, sse, http | stdio, sse, http |
| License | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| API Pricing | freemium | freemium |
Firecrawl Mcp Server and Mcp Server Qdrant are closely matched at the top with scores of 95 and 92. Check each server's detail page to decide which fits your use case.
Compare up to 4 servers: mcppedia.org/compare/server-a-vs-server-b-vs-server-c