Base Onchain Tools vs Token Holders API

In-depth architectural comparison of the Base Onchain Tools and Token Holders API MCP servers. Compare execution transports, security boundaries, tool capabilities, quality scores, and ready-to-paste client installation snippets for Claude, Cursor, Windsurf, and VS Code.

Which MCP Server Should You Choose?

B

Choose Base Onchain Tools when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Finance & Fintech domain.
• You prefer remote streaming HTTP/SSE transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).

Explore Base Onchain Tools Details

Choose Token Holders API when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Finance & Fintech domain.
• You prefer remote streaming HTTP/SSE transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
• Primary tools included: token_get_holder_analysis, address, chain.

Explore Token Holders API Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	B Base Onchain Tools Finance & Fintech	Token Holders API Finance & Fintech
Summary	Base mainnet analysis: contract audits, transfer simulation, token pricing. Paid via x402.	Token holder distribution — top holders, whale count, concentration score. x402.
Category & Scope	Finance & Fintech	Finance & Fintech

Tools & Capabilities Breakdown

Ready-to-Paste Client Configurations

Paste either (or both) of these JSON server blocks into your client config file (e.g. claude_desktop_config.json or ~/.cursor/mcp.json).

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "base-onchain-tools": {
      "url": "https://base-onchain-tools.dolerite.workers.dev"
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "token-holders-api": {
      "url": "https://img.shields.io/badge/MCP-server-blue)](https://token-holders.api.klymax402.com/mcp"
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons