ChowAPI vs FatSecret
FatSecret offers a food database API with OAuth 1.0a authentication and IP-based restrictions. It's popular for basic calorie tracking but limited in nutrient depth and developer experience.
Feature comparison
| Feature | ChowAPI | FatSecret |
|---|---|---|
| Foods in database | 1.6M+ | 1M+ |
| Nutrients per food | 34 | ~10 |
| Fuzzy search | ||
| Barcode lookup | ||
| Pricing | From $10/10K calls | $89-499/mo plans |
| Per-call pricing | $0.002 | $89-499/mo plans |
| AI / MCP support | ||
| IP restrictions | ||
| Confidence levels |
Pricing comparison
ChowAPI
Credit packs from $5 (50% off PAYG). Pay-as-you-go at $0.002/call. No contracts.
FatSecret
Tiered monthly plans. Free tier has severe limitations.
At 100K calls/month: ChowAPI costs $200 (pay-as-you-go at $0.002/call). FatSecret Premium costs $499/mo. You save 60%.
Code comparison
FatSecret
// FatSecret API (OAuth 1.0a)
// Requires: oauth-1.0a signature generation
const oauth = new OAuth1({
consumer: { key: "KEY", secret: "SECRET" },
signature_method: "HMAC-SHA1"
});
const url = "https://platform.fatsecret.com/rest/server.api";
const params = { method: "foods.search", search_expression: "chicken breast", format: "json" };
// ... sign request with OAuthChowAPI
// ChowAPI - just a Bearer token
const res = await fetch("https://api.chowapi.dev/v1/search?q=chicken+breast", {
headers: { "Authorization": "Bearer chow_live_YOUR_KEY" }
});Why developers switch
OAuth 1.0a authentication
Complex authentication that requires signing every request. No simple Bearer token.
IP address restrictions
API calls must come from registered IP addresses. Breaks serverless and edge deployments.
Only ~10 nutrients
Basic macros only. No vitamins, minerals, or micronutrient data.
No fuzzy search
Exact matching only. Users must spell food names correctly.
Limited free tier
Free tier is heavily restricted with low rate limits.