OnchainDiligence vs Pulsenetwork

In-depth architectural comparison of the OnchainDiligence and Pulsenetwork 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 OnchainDiligence 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 OnchainDiligence Details

Choose Pulsenetwork 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 Pulsenetwork Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	OnchainDiligence Finance & Fintech	Pulsenetwork Finance & Fintech
Summary	Pay-per-call sanctions screening and UK company checks for agents, paid in USDC via x402.	785+ paid intelligence endpoints in one MCP server — agents pay per query via x402 USDC on Base.
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": {
    "onchaindiligence": {
      "url": "https://x402.org"
    }
  }
}

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

Related MCP Server Comparisons