| Ecosystem |
| 0 |
| 0 |
| Match Graph | 0 | 0 |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| Capabilities | 7 decomposed | 9 decomposed |
| Times Matched | 0 | 0 |
Accepts free-form natural language queries about companies and returns structured company intelligence by translating user intent into database lookups and aggregated data sources. The system likely uses semantic understanding to map conversational queries (e.g., 'What's Apple's revenue trend?') to specific financial metrics and company attributes, then retrieves and synthesizes results from multiple underlying data sources without requiring users to learn terminal syntax or specific query languages.
Unique: Eliminates terminal-style query syntax by using conversational NLP to map free-form questions directly to financial data lookups, lowering the barrier to entry compared to Bloomberg terminals or SEC Edgar's structured search interface
vs alternatives: Faster onboarding than traditional financial terminals because users ask questions in natural language rather than learning proprietary query syntax or database schemas
Integrates company data from multiple sources (likely SEC filings, company websites, financial databases) into a unified query interface, abstracting away the need for users to manually visit separate platforms. The system maintains connectors or ETL pipelines to ingest and normalize data from heterogeneous sources, then serves unified responses that cite or blend information from multiple origins.
Unique: Abstracts away manual source-switching by maintaining ETL pipelines to ingest and normalize SEC filings, company websites, and financial databases into a unified query layer, whereas competitors like Yahoo Finance or Seeking Alpha require users to navigate separate sections for each data type
vs alternatives: Reduces research friction compared to manually cross-referencing SEC Edgar, company investor relations pages, and financial databases because all data is accessible through a single conversational interface
Retrieves and presents company financial metrics (revenue, market cap, P/E ratio, debt levels, employee count, etc.) with historical snapshots to show trends over time. The system stores or accesses time-series financial data, likely from quarterly/annual SEC filings or financial data providers, and can surface how metrics have evolved across multiple reporting periods.
Unique: Surfaces historical financial trends through conversational queries rather than requiring users to manually pull and compare multiple SEC filings or use spreadsheet-based analysis, making trend analysis accessible to non-technical investors
vs alternatives: More accessible than SEC Edgar for trend analysis because users ask 'How has Apple's revenue grown?' in natural language rather than manually downloading and comparing 10-Q filings across years
Generates concise, human-readable company overviews by synthesizing business descriptions, industry classification, key products/services, and leadership information from multiple sources. The system likely uses text generation or template-based synthesis to create coherent company profiles that combine structured data (industry, employee count) with narrative content (business model, competitive positioning).
Unique: Generates natural-language company overviews through synthesis rather than serving static company descriptions, allowing dynamic profile generation tailored to user queries, whereas competitors like Crunchbase serve pre-written profiles
vs alternatives: Faster company research than reading SEC filings or company websites because synthesized summaries distill key information into conversational responses without requiring users to navigate dense documents
Maintains conversation context across multiple turns, allowing users to ask follow-up questions about a company without re-specifying the company name or context. The system likely stores the current conversation state (company in focus, previously retrieved metrics) and uses it to interpret subsequent queries, enabling natural dialogue flow.
Unique: Maintains multi-turn conversation context to enable natural follow-up questions without re-specifying company names, whereas stateless financial lookup tools require users to re-enter company identifiers with each query
vs alternatives: More natural research flow than stateless tools like Yahoo Finance search because users can ask 'What about their debt levels?' after asking about revenue, without re-specifying the company
Provides free access to core company lookup and summarization features with usage quotas or rate limits, while premium tiers unlock higher query volumes, advanced filtering, or additional data sources. The system implements quota tracking and tier enforcement at the API or session level to differentiate free vs. paid users.
Unique: Removes financial barriers to entry by offering free access to core company research features, whereas Bloomberg terminals and institutional data providers require expensive subscriptions upfront, making financial research accessible to retail investors
vs alternatives: Lower barrier to entry than Bloomberg or FactSet because free tier allows casual users to explore company data without commitment, though premium features and pricing are not clearly communicated
Resolves company names or tickers to specific entities, handling ambiguity when multiple companies share similar names or when users provide partial/misspelled identifiers. The system likely uses fuzzy matching, ticker resolution, or entity disambiguation to map user input to canonical company records in the underlying database.
Unique: Handles company name ambiguity and partial matches through fuzzy matching rather than requiring exact ticker input, making company lookup more forgiving for non-expert users compared to terminal-style tools that require precise tickers
vs alternatives: More user-friendly than ticker-only lookup because users can search by company name and the system resolves to the correct entity, whereas Bloomberg terminals require users to know exact ticker symbols
Executes SQL queries against Supabase PostgreSQL instances through the Model Context Protocol, translating natural language or structured query requests into parameterized SQL statements. Uses MCP's tool-calling interface to expose database operations as callable functions with schema validation, enabling LLM agents to perform CRUD operations, joins, and aggregations with automatic connection pooling and credential management through Supabase client SDK.
Unique: Exposes Supabase PostgreSQL as MCP tools with automatic credential injection from Supabase client SDK, eliminating manual connection string management and enabling seamless LLM-to-database queries within Claude or compatible agents
vs alternatives: Tighter integration than generic SQL MCP servers because it leverages Supabase's built-in authentication and connection pooling rather than requiring separate database credential configuration
Exposes Supabase Auth session state and user metadata through MCP tools, allowing agents to inspect current authentication context, retrieve user profiles, and trigger auth-related operations. Integrates with Supabase's JWT-based auth system to validate sessions and access user claims without re-authenticating, using the Supabase client's built-in session management.
Unique: Integrates Supabase's JWT-based auth system directly into MCP tool interface, allowing agents to inspect and act on auth state without managing separate credential stores or re-authentication flows
vs alternatives: More seamless than generic auth MCP servers because it leverages Supabase's built-in session management and avoids redundant credential passing between agent and auth system
Invokes Supabase Edge Functions (serverless TypeScript/JavaScript functions) through MCP tools, passing parameters and receiving results with optional streaming support. Uses Supabase's edge function HTTP API to trigger functions with automatic authentication headers and response parsing, enabling agents to execute custom business logic without embedding it in the agent itself.
Supabase scores higher at 42/100 vs StonksGPT at 40/100. StonksGPT leads on adoption and quality, while Supabase is stronger on ecosystem.
Need something different?
Search the match graph →© 2026 Unfragile. Stronger through disorder.
Unique: Exposes Supabase Edge Functions as MCP tools with automatic authentication and response parsing, allowing agents to invoke custom serverless logic without managing HTTP clients or credential injection
vs alternatives: More integrated than generic HTTP MCP tools because it handles Supabase-specific authentication, error handling, and response formatting automatically
Subscribes to real-time changes on Supabase tables through MCP's event streaming interface, using Supabase's PostgreSQL LISTEN/NOTIFY mechanism to push INSERT, UPDATE, and DELETE events to agents. Maintains persistent WebSocket connections and filters events by table and row-level policies, enabling agents to react to database changes without polling.
Unique: Bridges Supabase's PostgreSQL LISTEN/NOTIFY real-time system with MCP's tool interface, enabling agents to subscribe to database changes without managing WebSocket connections or event serialization
vs alternatives: More efficient than polling-based approaches because it uses Supabase's native real-time infrastructure rather than repeated database queries
Manages files in Supabase Storage buckets through MCP tools, supporting upload, download, list, and delete operations with automatic authentication and path-based access control. Uses Supabase's S3-compatible storage API with built-in support for public/private buckets and signed URLs for temporary access, enabling agents to handle file I/O without managing cloud storage credentials.
Unique: Exposes Supabase Storage's S3-compatible API as MCP tools with automatic authentication and signed URL generation, eliminating the need for agents to manage cloud storage credentials or generate temporary access tokens
vs alternatives: More integrated than generic S3 MCP tools because it leverages Supabase's built-in bucket policies and authentication rather than requiring separate AWS credentials
Performs semantic similarity searches on vector embeddings stored in Supabase PostgreSQL using pgvector extension, translating natural language queries into embedding vectors and executing cosine/L2 distance searches. Integrates with embedding providers (OpenAI, Cohere) or uses pre-computed embeddings, enabling agents to retrieve semantically similar documents or records without full-text search limitations.
Unique: Integrates pgvector directly into MCP tools with automatic embedding generation and distance calculation, enabling agents to perform semantic search without managing separate vector database infrastructure
vs alternatives: More efficient than external vector databases (Pinecone, Weaviate) for Supabase users because it colocates embeddings with relational data, reducing network latency and simplifying data synchronization
Exposes Supabase database schema information through MCP tools, allowing agents to discover table structures, column types, constraints, and relationships without manual schema documentation. Queries PostgreSQL information_schema and Supabase metadata tables to dynamically generate schema descriptions, enabling agents to construct valid queries and understand data relationships.
Unique: Queries Supabase's PostgreSQL information_schema directly through MCP tools, enabling agents to dynamically discover and adapt to database schemas without pre-configured schema definitions
vs alternatives: More flexible than static schema definitions because it reflects live database state, including recent migrations or schema changes
Enforces Supabase Row-Level Security policies within agent queries, ensuring that agents can only access rows permitted by RLS rules defined in the database. Evaluates policies based on authenticated user context (JWT claims, user ID) and applies WHERE clause filters automatically, preventing unauthorized data access at the database layer rather than application layer.
Unique: Delegates authorization enforcement to PostgreSQL RLS policies rather than implementing authorization in agent code, ensuring that data access rules are centralized and cannot be bypassed by agent logic
vs alternatives: More secure than application-level authorization because RLS is enforced at the database layer, preventing accidental data leaks even if agent code has bugs
+1 more capabilities