Metals-API vs Metals.dev
Metals-API and Metals.dev sit in the same weight class: broad multi-metal catalogs, wide currency lists, and a pitch built on coverage rather than a single specialist metal. Where they diverge is price and how each explains its own numbers. Metals.dev names its benchmark sources outright (LBMA, LME, MCX, IBJA); Metals-API's page doesn't. The table below pulls every figure straight from each provider's own published pages.
| Feature | Metals-API | Metals.dev |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing | ||
| Cheapest paid plan | $29/mo | $1.79/mo (2,000 requests) |
| Production-tier plan | $99/mo | $39.99/mo (100,000 requests) |
| Free tier | Not stated in their public docs | 100 requests/month, no card required |
| Overage policy | Auto-bills | Plan-based quota |
| Coverage | ||
| Currencies supported | 170+ | 170+ |
| Named benchmark sources (LBMA, LME, MCX, IBJA) | Not stated in their public docs | Yes, named explicitly |
| Platinum & palladium | Not stated in their public docs | Yes |
| Copper (HG) futures | Yes | Yes |
| Data freshness & history | ||
| Real-time update delay | Not stated in their public docs | Up to 60 seconds |
| Historical daily depth | Not stated in their public docs | 5+ years, 30-day max per request |
| Developer experience | ||
| Fixer.io-compatible endpoint shape | Yes, stated explicitly | Not stated in their public docs |
| Native MCP server | None | No, stated explicitly |
Source: metals-api.com and metals.dev/pricing + public docs, as captured on our /comparison/metals-api and /comparison/metals-dev pages. Last verified 2026-04-20 (Metals-API) and 2026-06-29 (Metals.dev).
Pricing: Metals.dev opens far cheaper
A $1.79/mo entry plan against $29/mo is a wide gap for anyone testing a metals feed before committing budget. The gap compresses at production volume, $39.99/mo for 100,000 requests on Metals.dev against $99/mo on Metals-API, but Metals.dev still comes out cheaper at both ends in the figures each provider publishes.
The overage behavior differs too. Metals-API auto-bills past quota. Metals.dev's page frames its overage handling as a plan-based quota instead, a distinct policy rather than a synonym for the same thing.
Naming the source behind the number
Metals.dev is the more specific of the two about where its prices come from: it names LBMA, LME, MCX, and IBJA as blended inputs, though it doesn't publish the blend weights or per-source attribution on individual responses. Metals-API's own comparison page makes no equivalent claim about a specific benchmark authority, so that traceability advantage sits with Metals.dev based on what's actually published.
Coverage and freshness
Both list broad currency support at 170+. Metals.dev additionally lists platinum and palladium, which Metals-API's own page doesn't specifically address even while claiming broad industrial-metals breadth elsewhere. Metals.dev also publishes concrete freshness and history figures, up to a 60-second delay on real-time data and 5+ years of history capped at a 30-day window per request, where Metals-API's page stays general (historical and time-series data) without matching detail.
FAQ
- Where's the biggest price gap between these two?
- At the entry rung. Metals.dev's cheapest paid plan is $1.79/mo for 2,000 requests, against Metals-API's $29/mo. At the top end the gap narrows some: $39.99/mo for 100,000 requests on Metals.dev versus $99/mo on Metals-API.
- Does either name its actual pricing benchmarks?
- Metals.dev does, explicitly: it states its numbers blend LBMA, LME, MCX, and IBJA rates into a single figure per metal, without publishing the blend weights. Metals-API's own page doesn't name a specific benchmark authority.
- Which covers platinum and palladium?
- Metals.dev, per its own coverage list. Metals-API's page doesn't specifically address platinum or palladium, even though it markets broad industrial-metals coverage elsewhere on the same page.
- How fresh is the data on each?
- Metals.dev states its real-time data can lag up to 60 seconds. Metals-API's own page doesn't publish an equivalent freshness figure, so a direct comparison isn't possible from public sources.
- What's the historical data window like?
- Metals.dev states 5+ years of history with a 30-day maximum per single request, meaning a longer pull requires multiple calls. Metals-API's page references historical and time-series data without a stated depth or per-request limit.
- Is either one a drop-in replacement for an existing integration?
- Only Metals-API makes that specific claim, stating its endpoint shape follows the Fixer.io convention. Metals.dev's page doesn't claim compatibility with another provider's API shape.
A quant team pricing a gold position doesn't want a blend. It wants to know which number moved and why.
Take a trading desk comparing a live oracle tick against a futures settlement print and the two have drifted apart. Metals-API and Metals.dev each return one figure per metal; neither publishes a way to see two sources side by side on the same response. goldprice.dev's /v1/prices/divergence endpoint exists for exactly that moment, flagging when live spot and futures settlement disagree, alongside a sources[] array naming each contributing feed with its own license and timestamp. Gold starts at $10/mo, silver and copper join at $30/mo.