Head to head
Januscope vs Build
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
Local MCP proxy for tool restrictions, response redaction, audit logs, and database schema context.
Full listing
No reviews yet
Start a NorthernGo cloud build from Cursor, Claude or Codex. EU database included.
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 Januscope (92/100 against 60). Build is hosted and callable through the gateway; Januscope runs on your own machine. Januscope has noticeably more public adoption.
| Januscope | Build | |
|---|---|---|
| User rating | No reviews yet | No reviews yet |
| Safety grade | A92/100 | C60/100 |
| Adoption | Growing | New |
| GitHub stars | 30 | – |
| Downloads / week | 80 | – |
| Runs where | Your machine (local) | Hosted (remote) |
| Gateway-ready | No | Yes |
| Tools | — | — |
| Write actions | — | — |
| Price per call | Free | Free |
| Licence | AGPL-3.0 | — |
| Last release | 2026-09-19 | — |
| Category | Databases | Databases |