Head to head
webfetch vs three.ws Signals
Same numbers we show everywhere else, lined up. Ratings come from users, the grade comes from our scanner, adoption comes from public registries.
No reviews yet
Self-hosted web search for LLM agents: search -> fetch -> rank pipeline with semantic caching
Full listing
No reviews yet
Discover signal feeds ranked by proven edge, rank publishers, and subscribe + track results.
Full listingThe short version
Neither has been reviewed yet, so the comparison rests on the scan and the public usage numbers. The safety scan favours three.ws Signals (83/100 against 71). three.ws Signals has noticeably more public adoption.
| webfetch | three.ws Signals | |
|---|---|---|
| User rating | No reviews yet | No reviews yet |
| Safety grade | B71/100 | B83/100 |
| Adoption | Growing | Established |
| GitHub stars | 56 | 206 |
| Downloads / week | 18 | 41 |
| Runs where | Your machine (local) | Your machine (local) |
| Gateway-ready | No | No |
| Tools | 5 | — |
| Write actions | — | — |
| Price per call | Free | Free |
| Licence | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| Last release | 2026-07-23 | 2026-09-22 |
| Category | SEO | SEO |