Bitfence Risk Oracle vs X402 Extract

In-depth architectural comparison of the Bitfence Risk Oracle and X402 Extract 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?

Choose Bitfence Risk Oracle when:

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

Explore Bitfence Risk Oracle Details

Choose X402 Extract when:

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

Explore X402 Extract Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	Bitfence Risk Oracle Finance & Fintech	X402 Extract Finance & Fintech
Summary	Pre-transaction token risk checks for autonomous agents on six chains. Read-only; paid via x402.	Pay-per-call MCP server. $0.01 USDC extracts schema.org/Product JSON from any URL via 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": {
    "bitfence-risk-oracle": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "bitfence-risk-oracle"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "x402-extract": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "x402-extract-mcp"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons