Side-by-Side Model Context Protocol Comparison
Filingpulse vs Insidergraph
In-depth architectural comparison of the Filingpulse and Insidergraph 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.
At a Glance & Executive Verdict
Filingpulse
Developer Tools · Remote HTTP/SSE
Quality: 25/100 (Emerging) | Auth: No auth required
Insidergraph
Developer Tools · Remote HTTP/SSE
Quality: 42/100 (Fair) | Auth: No auth required
Verdict Summary: Choose Filingpulse if you need specialized Developer Tools tools running via a hosted cloud SSE transport. Choose Insidergraph if your workspace requires Developer Tools integration with remote web transport. Both servers can be configured concurrently in your client's
mcpServers manifest.Which MCP Server Should You Choose?
F
Choose Filingpulse when:
- You need dedicated capabilities in the Developer Tools domain.
- You prefer remote streaming HTTP/SSE transport architecture.
- Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
I
Choose Insidergraph when:
- You need dedicated capabilities in the Developer Tools domain.
- You prefer remote streaming HTTP/SSE transport architecture.
- Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
Feature & Specification Comparison
Tools & Capabilities Breakdown
Filingpulse Tools (0)
No explicit tool names declared in metadata yet. Check project README on main listing page.
Insidergraph Tools (0)
No explicit tool names declared in metadata yet. Check project README on main listing page.
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).
Filingpulse Configuration
Insidergraph Configuration