Head to head
Arxiv vs Scholar Feed
Same numbers we show everywhere else, lined up. Ratings come from users, the grade comes from our scanner, adoption comes from public registries.
Arxiv
Cio.github.mrfentmen/arxiv-mcpNo reviews yet
Search academic papers on arXiv by keyword, author, or title. No key required.
Full listing
No reviews yet
Rank CS/AI/ML papers by citations, forecast impact, or code adoption; trace 23.2M citation edges.
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 Scholar Feed (79/100 against 65). Scholar Feed is hosted and callable through the gateway; Arxiv runs on your own machine. Scholar Feed has noticeably more public adoption.
| Arxiv | Scholar Feed | |
|---|---|---|
| User rating | No reviews yet | No reviews yet |
| Safety grade | C65/100 | B79/100 |
| Adoption | — | Established |
| GitHub stars | – | 11 |
| Downloads / week | – | 187 |
| Runs where | Your machine (local) | Hosted (remote) |
| Gateway-ready | No | Yes |
| Tools | 2 | 27 |
| Write actions | — | 6 |
| Price per call | Free | Free |
| Licence | MIT | MIT |
| Last release | — | 2026-09-15 |
| Category | SEO | SEO |