Best web search API by multi-search quality in this benchmark: Parallel basic, 46.5% F1. Fastest search: SERP (RapidAPI), 2.93s (0.4% F1). Lowest recorded search price: TinyFish, $0.00 per 1,000 queries within its free-tier limits.
Compare Exa, Tavily, Brave, Parallel, Firecrawl and other search providers using the same multi-search agent, with quality, speed and pricing per 1,000 queries upfront. Compare 12 providers across 20 configurations, including Exa, Tavily, Brave, Parallel and Firecrawl, on the same questions.
Updated 20 September 2026. Last measured 14 September 2026.
Mean F1 on 45 company-discovery questions with multiple constraints, using the same agent and search results. F1 balances precision and recall; it is distinct from percentage accuracy on a single-answer test. Prices are the benchmark-recorded rate basis, with the same configurations used for the quality results.
| Rank | Provider & configuration | F1 | Mean search time | Recorded $ / 1,000 queries | Median task time | Median task cost | Official docs |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Parallel basicparallel-basicPOST /v1/search mode=basic | 46.5% | 19.77s | $5.00mode=basic · 10 results | 67.63s | $1.12 | Official docs ↗ |
| 2 | Exa deepexa-deepPOST /search type=deep | 45.4% | 44.68s | $12.00type=deep | 89.50s | $0.72 | Official docs ↗ |
| 3 | Parallel advancedparallel-advancedPOST /v1/search mode=advanced | 44.2% | 36.58s | $5.00mode=advanced · 10 results | 83.43s | $0.62 | Official docs ↗ |
| 4 | Exa instantexa-instantPOST /search type=instant | 43.3% | 6.21s | $7.00type=instant · up to 10 results | 49.83s | $0.65 | Official docs ↗ |
| 5 | Linkup fastlinkup-fastPOST /v1/search depth=fast | 41.1% | 17.52s | $5.00depth=fast · searchResults | 64.20s | $0.92 | Official docs ↗ |
| 6 | Tavily advancedtavily-advancedPOST /search search_depth=advanced | 41.1% | 46.58s | $16.002 credits · $0.008 PAYG | 92.17s | $1.03 | Official docs ↗ |
| 7 | Linkup standardlinkup-standardPOST /v1/search depth=standard | 40.6% | 25.10s | $5.00depth=standard · searchResults | 72.29s | $0.94 | Official docs ↗ |
| 8 | Youextraction_mode=highlightsPOST /v1/search | 38.6% | 7.72s | $5.00highlights included in Web Search | 48.16s | $0.97 | Official docs ↗ |
| 9 | Youextraction_mode=highlights · knowledge=corePOST /v1/search | 38.1% | 8.88s | $5.00highlights · knowledge=core · same Web Search price assumption | 47.64s | $0.90 | Official docs ↗ |
| 10 | Parallel fastparallel-fastPOST /v1/search mode=fast | 38.0% | 12.17s | $1.00mode=fast · 10 results | 53.93s | $0.46 | Official docs ↗ |
| 11 | Perplexitysearch_context_size=lowPOST /search | 37.8% | 14.11s | $5.00Search API · POST /search | 48.94s | $0.33 | Official docs ↗ |
| 12 | Tavily basictavily-basicPOST /search search_depth=basic | 36.5% | 20.09s | $8.001 credit · $0.008 PAYG | 63.04s | $0.61 | Official docs ↗ |
| 13 | Parallel turboparallel-turboPOST /v1/search mode=turbo | 34.7% | 5.08s | $1.00mode=turbo · 10 results | 46.40s | $0.42 | Official docs ↗ |
| 14 | Nimblesearch_depth=standard · full_content=false · focus=generalPOST /v2/search | 30.7% | 12.22s | $5.00search_depth=standard · full_content=false | 52.97s | $0.47 | Official docs ↗ |
| 15 | FirecrawlfirecrawlPOST /v2/search | 30.4% | 39.44s | $5.002 credits / 10 results | 74.98s | $0.28 | Official docs ↗ |
| 16 | Brave SearchbraveGET /res/v1/web/search | 28.0% | 7.60s | $5.00Recorded search-request rate; see official terms. | 43.52s | $0.27 | Official docs ↗ |
| 17 | TinyFishtinyfishGET api.search.tinyfish.ai | 26.6% | 27.34s | $0.0030 req/min cap | 64.24s | $0.21 | Official docs ↗ |
| 18 | Nimblesearch_depth=lite · full_content=false · focus=generalPOST /v2/search | 24.1% | 34.43s | $1.10search_depth=lite · full_content=false | 67.17s | $0.22 | Official docs ↗ |
| 19 | Seltzseltz-companiesPOST /v1/search scope=companies | 14.5% | 8.98s | $5.00Recorded search-request rate; see official terms. | 55.16s | $1.75 | Official docs ↗ |
| 20 | SERP (RapidAPI)serpGET google-search74.p.rapidapi.com | 0.4% | 2.93s | $3.00Pro overage $0.003/request | 31.38s | $0.10 | Official docs ↗ |
| Your workflow | Primary measure | What is tested | Full comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Multiple searches to assemble evidence | F1: balance of precision and recall | The same agent discovers sets of companies matching multiple constraints. This is the main ranking above. | Multi-search benchmark → |
| Search for a direct factual answer | Extracted-answer accuracy | Current company facts, with the same questions and fixed extraction process. | Search accuracy → |
| Retrieve documentation and complete a developer task | Grounded task completion | An agent produces a passing patch and cites evidence returned during the run. | Retrieval comparison → |
Compare scores within a board. Each board measures a different outcome, so its percentages keep their own meaning. Search-plus-scrape runs expand the available tools and have separate results on the full benchmark pages.
For an agent that plans several searches and combines evidence, start with the multi-search ranking above. F1 rewards finding the right results while limiting incorrect ones. For direct factual answers, use the search accuracy board. For documentation retrieval and developer agents, use task completion. Each answers a different buying question.
Rankings depend on the questions, agent model, search budget, endpoint mode and available tools. A system that finds one answer-bearing passage can perform differently when asked to recover a whole set of matching results. Compare the exact configurations and scoring rules before carrying a winner from one task to another.
The search-time column measures an API request; task time measures the complete agent run. A faster endpoint may still need more searches to assemble enough evidence. Read both alongside F1 and total task cost when choosing an API for repeated-search workflows.
Price per 1,000 queries measures search calls. Median task cost includes the agent’s model and search spend across a full question. Free allowances, result depth and extra scraping change the bill. Use the recorded prices to interpret these runs and the official pricing links to build a current budget.
The code and public dataset sample are linked below. Keep your agent, query set and tool budget fixed while trying alternative search providers. Report the score and cost for each configuration separately. A buying guide is most useful when another team can understand and repeat the comparison.
Mean F1 on 45 company-discovery questions with multiple constraints, using the same agent and search results. F1 balances precision and recall; it is distinct from percentage accuracy on a single-answer test. Each row is one measured configuration. Missing measurements appear as a dash.
Open benchmark code ↗ · Public dataset sample ↗ · All benchmark methods →
Compare multi-search and search-plus-scrape results →
Other studies: AIMultiple's returned-result evaluation ↗ · Artificial Analysis Search Index methodology ↗. Their datasets and scoring differ from the F1 board above.
Best web search API by multi-search quality in this benchmark: Parallel basic, 46.5% F1. Fastest search: SERP (RapidAPI), 2.93s (0.4% F1). Lowest recorded search price: TinyFish, $0.00 per 1,000 queries within its free-tier limits.
Mean F1 on 45 company-discovery questions with multiple constraints, using the same agent and search results. F1 balances precision and recall; it is distinct from percentage accuracy on a single-answer test.
The recorded search endpoint's request price. Model-token spend, optional scraping and plan conditions are separate. For rows with task measurements, median task cost is shown in its own column. Check the linked provider terms for current pricing.