oFans-API is a solid OnlyFans API for developers. Fanduit covers the same ground and adds first-class Fansly, an MCP server with 363 tools, and a built-in AI suite.
# both are APIs — parity + independence Fanduit the programmable OnlyFans + Fansly layer oFans-API a comparable API provider → pick what you build on, not what boxes you in
oFans-API focuses on OnlyFans for developers and reports a strong uptime record. Fanduit is broader: OnlyFans and Fansly on the same surface, plus MCP and AI as first-class features rather than add-ons.
| Capability | Fanduit | oFans-API |
|---|---|---|
| OnlyFans API | ✓ | ✓ |
| Fansly on the same surface | ✓ | partial |
| Endpoint coverage | 351 | core set |
| MCP server for AI agents | 363 tools | limited |
| AI analytics + AI assistant | ✓ | chat only |
| No-code (Zapier / Make / n8n) | ✓ | partial |
| Signed webhooks + credit metering | ✓ | ✓ |
| Reported uptime history | newer | ✓ |
OnlyFans and Fansly resolve per account on the same endpoints, so you build once and support both.
All 351 endpoints are also MCP tools, so an AI agent operates the full surface, not a narrow subset.
Structured fan, financial, and chat reports plus a read-only agency assistant, not just chat automation.
The endpoint list is generated from the registry, so the docs always match what the API serves.
We would rather you pick the right tool than oversell ours.
They publish a long uptime record and an established agency base. Fanduit is newer and has not accumulated that history yet.
First-class Fansly on the same surface, a full MCP tool catalog, and an AI reporting suite beyond chat automation.
The core is metered, signed, and proxied like any production API. It is newer, so it has less public uptime history than incumbents.
Yes. Nothing stops you running Fanduit alongside another provider for redundancy.
Connect an account and call the same surface for OnlyFans and Fansly.