An API-to-API comparison
Modash API vs
Influencers.club API
A side-by-side comparison of the Modash API and the Influencers.club API: published pricing, documented credit costs, endpoint coverage and the data each one returns per creator. No dashboard features, no campaign suites — just what you can call from code.
Updated August 2026
Modash API vs Influencers.club API: the short answer
The gap is resolution, not feature count. Both APIs return age, gender, location, language, interests, brand affinity, credibility and reachability. Per Modash’s published schema, interests, brand affinity and credibility sit on its Instagram report only; its TikTok and YouTube reports carry demographics and languages. Influencers.club returns the full block on all six discovery platforms, and resolves engaged-audience interests across a 32-interest, 413-sub-interest taxonomy with credibility as a score, a class label and histograms. Every creator also carries a niche and sub-niche drawn from a 32-interest, 413-sub-interest taxonomy, so a query can resolve to “sourdough baking” rather than “food”. Modash returns a flat interest list on the creator and on the audience; no niche or sub-niche field is documented.
One key against two contracts. Influencers.club runs 21 endpoint groups off a single credit pool: discovery with 90+ documented search filters plus 50+ has_* booleans, enrichment by handle or by email in either direction, batch jobs, connected accounts returned as a social graph, and campaign monitoring with webhooks and aggregated EMV. Modash splits reads across two separately contracted products — Discovery for search and reports, Raw for live unaggregated feeds — so needing both means buying both. Six full-profile platforms against their three.
The honest trade. Modash wins AI content search (it has vectorized creators’ photos and videos; Influencers.club’s natural-language search runs on profiles and filters, not media), brand-seeded collaboration lookup, published TikTok depth (250M+ against Influencers.club’s 23.4M discoverable today; 149M active TikTok creators are rolling into Discovery now), and raw, live platform feeds, which Influencers.club does not offer. Everything else — data returned per call, audience grain, platform breadth, campaign tracking, time to first call, and cost per enriched creator once you are past the entry tier — favours Influencers.club.
On commercials: Influencers.club is from $208/month on the Pro plan as published, cancel anytime, 10 free credits to test with no card. Modash is an annual contract with a sales call before you can test. Both vendors publish per-credit rates; the pricing section links to Modash’s and prints Influencers.club’s
Audience depth, then contact data
Engaged-audience interests resolved across 32 interests and 413 sub-niches, with a two-layer creator niche, credibility as a score with class label and histograms, and the full audience block on six platforms rather than one. Then the contact layer: a validated email rather than a contacts array of bio-listed strings, across 340M+ profiles that all carry contact data. Discovery is callable from the API, not just enrichment. Sourcing is published openly at influencers.club/our-data, with priority support and a first-party MCP server.
AI content search and TikTok depth
AI search that runs over the content itself — text or image queries matched against what appears in creators’ photos and videos (creators over 10k). 250M+ published TikTok profiles against Influencers.club’s 23.4M discoverable today (149M active creators rolling into Discovery next). Brand-seeded collaboration lookup. Raw API with live platform feeds for teams building their own pipelines.
Where they split
Analysis-grade creator records with monitoring built in, across six platforms and one credit pool — Influencers.club. Searching inside photos and videos, or building your own pipeline on raw feeds — Modash.
The Modash and Influencers.club APIs at a glance
This page compares APIs only. Modash also sells a platform product with campaign management, gifting, promo codes, Shopify integration and creator payments; those are dashboard features and are not callable from the API, so they are out of scope here.
What does the Modash API cost?
The Modash Discovery API starts at $16,200 per year on an annual-only contract, with the Raw API sold separately from $10,000 per year; the Influencers.club API is published from $208 per month. Credit both companies for publishing API pricing openly — most of this category hides it behind a demo. The difference is the commitment.
Modash: two separately contracted products, Discovery and Raw, annual only, paid by bank transfer, with a sales call before you can test. Their figures are on their own pricing page — this page links to it rather than restating it.
Influencers.club: from $208/month on the Pro plan, as published. Cancel monthly, and 10 free credits with no card before you pay anything.
| Detail | Influencers.club API | Modash API |
|---|---|---|
| Cost of entry | ||
| Entry price = your minimum first commitment | From $208/mo, as published | Annual contract — see their pricing page |
| Monthly billing available | Yes | Not published — annual terms only |
| Pay-as-you-go | Credit-based | Not offered |
| Self-serve signup | Trial key on signup, no card; paid plans via the pricing page | Sales call required |
| How you pay | Card, instantly | Bank transfer |
| Free evaluation | 10 credits, no card | Testing credits after a call |
| Credit economics | ||
| Cost per credit falls with volume on both sides | As low as $0.23 on Pro, as published | Published on their site |
| Included volume | Scales with plan | From 3,000/mo, tiered |
| Credits roll over | Yes | Yes, while contract active |
| Charged for failed requests | No — per successful result | No |
| Second product needed for live data | No, same API | Raw API, separately priced with its own quota; Discovery plans include a free Raw allowance for testing |
The same job, priced both ways
Influencers.club — one callPOST /public/v1/creators/enrich/handle/full/ → profile + metrics → niche + sub-niche (32 / 413 taxonomy) → engaged-audience interests (32 / 413) → gender / age cross-tab / city-level location → credibility + reachability → validated email → growth + posting frequency → monetization flags → sponsored posts + past sponsors (IG) → linked accounts on other platforms
Modash — one callGET /v1/instagram/profile/{userId}/report
→ profile + metrics
→ audience demographics (included)
→ contacts array — email only when
publicly listed; no validation status
(connected platforms: partial —
contacts hints, no identity graph) What endpoints do the Modash and Influencers.club APIs offer?
Influencers.club documents 19 endpoint groups under one contract; Modash documents two separately priced products. Modash splits reads across two contracts: analysed and aggregated data in the Discovery API, live and unaggregated data in the Raw API. If you need both, you are buying both. Influencers.club runs everything from one key and one credit pool.
| Endpoint | Influencers.club API | Modash API |
|---|---|---|
| Discovery | ||
| Filtered creator search | 0.01 cr per profile | 0.01 cr per result |
| Matched filter values each creator returns why it matched — vet from the search response | 0.03 cr/creator, replaces base rate — resolved bands for posting frequency, growth and income, creator-signal booleans, hashtags | A match object in the 0.01-credit result — geo, language, gender, age, growth, brands, interests and audience splits hit |
| Natural-language / AI search | NL over profiles & filters | Semantic, over post content |
| Search inside photos & videos text or image query matched against media content | No | 0.025 cr/result, creators >10k Unique |
| Similar / lookalike creators | Yes | Yes |
| Audience overlap between creators | Dedicated endpoint | Yes |
| Exclusion lists | Yes, on filtered search | Include / exclude lists in AI Search and lookalikes; not on standard filtered search |
| Filter dictionary endpoint | Yes, 0 credits | Yes — interests, locations, languages, brands, topics, hashtags per platform; 0 credits |
| Enrichment | ||
| Full profile by handle | Yes — 1 credit, everything included (11 enrichment platforms; audience block on the six full-profile platforms) | 1 cr, profile report |
| Core profile only identity, metrics and contact record, no audience block | 0.2 cr | No — full report only |
| Audience analytics only lookalikes included | 0.8 cr | No — full report only |
| Raw profile by handle | 0.03 cr | Raw API, priced per request |
| LinkedIn enrichment vs discovery | Enrichment yes (full + raw) — search not yet | Not documented |
| Reverse lookup from an email | 0.05 cr | 0.02 cr/match (email-search) |
| Connected socials from a handle | 0.5 cr Unique | No |
| Batch enrichment | Yes, per-entity billing Unique | No batch profile enrichment |
| Creator email in the response | Included — validated before delivery | As-found in contacts; no validation status documented |
| Monitoring & content | ||
| Campaign objects via API | Create, update, pause, archive Unique | Platform only |
| Webhook subscriptions | Yes Unique | Polling model |
| Aggregated campaign metrics (EMV, ER) | Yes Unique | Build it yourself |
| Creator posts | Yes | Raw API |
| Post detail | Yes | Raw API |
| Comments & comment replies | Per post (Instagram, TikTok, YouTube), 0.03 cr | Raw API, as a stream |
| Raw platform feeds live profile, feed, hashtag and comment data returned as-is | Not offered | Raw API |
| Brand collaboration history per creator — who they have worked with | Sponsored posts + past sponsors | 0.2 cr |
| Account & developer experience | ||
| Programmatic credit balance | Yes | Yes |
| Auth options | Bearer JWT, managed API keys, OAuth PKCE | Static API token (Bearer header or access_token parameter); no OAuth |
| Programmatic API key management | Yes | Dashboard only |
| Postman collection | Yes | Yes |
| Service health endpoint | No — credits and usage endpoint only | Free, unmetered |
| Docs served as Markdown for LLMs | Yes — llms.txt + .md pages | Yes — llms.txt + .md pages |
| MCP server | Yes Unique | No first-party server |
What data does each API return per creator?
The question that matters: how much of a creator record arrives in a single response? That decides how many calls your pipeline makes and how much reconciliation logic you write.
One Influencers.club credit returns the profile, niche and sub-niche, audience analytics resolved to sub-niche, growth and posting trends, monetization signals, sponsored posts with past sponsors, the creator’s linked accounts on other platforms, and the full audience block; the dedicated Connected Socials call (0.5 credits) returns the linked-account graph on demand. One Modash credit returns the profile report with audience demographics — the email only as-found in a contacts array, with no validation status documented.
| Data point | Influencers.club API | Modash API |
|---|---|---|
| Identity & reach | ||
| Followers, engagement rate, avg views | Yes | Yes |
| Follower growth trend | Yes | Yes |
| Posting frequency | Yes | Yes — avgPosts4weeks (TikTok, YouTube); posting-frequency filter in AI Search |
| Public bio, link in bio, description text | Searchable | Searchable — bio / full-name filter and caption keywords |
| Account type classification | Yes | Yes — Regular / Business / Creator (Instagram) |
| Last posted date | Filterable | Filterable — days since |
| Cross-platform | ||
| Connected accounts on other platforms | Linked accounts across 47 platforms | Bio-listed contact strings only — no profile data, no identity-graph endpoint documented |
| Filter by presence on another platform has_youtube, has_patreon, has_shopify — 50+ in total | Yes | Partial — hasYouTube on Instagram search, plus contact-type filters (21 types) |
| Single call returns all platforms | Linked platform objects in the enrichment; linked-account graph via Connected Socials, 0.5 cr | One call per platform |
| Commercial signals | ||
| Validated email | Validated before delivery | As-found only |
| Email validation or deliverability field | Verified before delivery; status field not named in the API reference | Not defined in the published specification |
| Income / earnings estimates | Estimated range, min/max Unique | No |
| Monetization flags TikTok Shop, YouTube monetization | Yes Unique | No |
| Sponsored post history | In full enrichment (Instagram; TikTok returns them too, not yet in the reference) | Yes |
| Brand collaboration mapping query by brand to list its creators | Per creator only | Yes, brand-seeded |
| Content | ||
| Recent posts with metrics | Yes | Yes |
| Per-post EMV and engagement rate | Yes, calculated | Likes, comments, views per post; no EMV field in the spec |
| Media asset URLs | Yes | Yes |
Does the Modash API include audience demographics?
Modash’s audience block returns age, gender, location, language, interests, brand affinity, credibility and reachability inside its 1-credit Instagram report; per its published schema the TikTok and YouTube reports carry demographics and languages but not audience interests, brand affinity or credibility. One Influencers.club credit returns more: the same categories plus linked accounts, income estimate, sponsored-post history and engaged-audience interests down to sub-niche.
Influencers.club returns the same categories at a finer grain. The difference is not which fields exist — it is how far down they resolve:
- Gender, age with a gender-by-age cross-tab, location to city level, language — on all six platforms
- Creator niche and sub-niche from a 32-interest, 413-sub-interest taxonomy — segments resolve to “sourdough baking”, not “food”
- Audience interests with affinity scores, brand affinity
- Credibility score with class label and histograms, reachability in four buckets, four-class composition
Audience overlap between creators is a separate endpoint at 1 credit per request, on both sides.
| Data point | Influencers.club API | Modash API |
|---|---|---|
| Resolution | ||
| Engaged-audience interests what the people engaging actually care about, to sub-niche | 32 interests → 413 sub-niches | Flat interest list with weights (Instagram report) |
| Demographics | ||
| Audience gender split | Yes | Yes |
| Audience age distribution | Yes, + gender cross-tab | Yes, + gender cross-tab |
| Audience location | To city level | Country on all three; state and city on Instagram |
| Audience language | Yes | Yes |
| Creator niche classification | 32 niches → 413 sub-niches | Flat creator-interest list; no niche or sub-niche field documented |
| Quality & composition | ||
| Audience credibility | Score + class + histograms | Score + histogram (Instagram) |
| Audience composition four audience quality classes | Four classes | Four classes |
| Audience reachability | 4 bucket distribution | 4 buckets (Instagram, TikTok) |
| Brand affinity | Yes | Yes (Instagram) |
| Method & delivery | ||
| Audience overlap between creators | Dedicated endpoint, 1 cr | Yes, 1 cr |
| Sample size & confidence exposed | Histogram bucket counts | Histogram bin counts (Instagram) |
| Billed as a separate report | No, included | No, included |
Modash API vs Influencers.club: campaign tracking and monitoring
Influencers.club tracks campaigns in the dashboard and ships the same tracker as endpoints. Modash’s campaign features are documented for its platform product; through the API you get the Raw API: live posts, feeds and comments, returned as-is. You poll, structure, deduplicate and calculate your own metrics. For a bespoke pipeline, exactly right.
The same tracker, called from code. Create a campaign, add creators by handle, and detected posts push to your webhook. All of it billed at 0.3 credits per distinct creator per day:
- Per-creator metrics — posts, views, engagement, ER, EMV, 7-day trend
- Aggregated campaign overview, plus a content feed with per-post EMV and top-performer flags
- Webhooks for new posts, bio changes, link-in-bio changes and follower milestones
- Estimated reach, an AI-written performance report, CSV export — included in the same rate
| Capability | Influencers.club API | Modash API |
|---|---|---|
| Delivery model | Webhook push | Polling |
| Campaign as an API object | Create, update, pause, archive Unique | No |
| Add creators programmatically | Yes | No |
| Multi-platform under one campaign | Yes | Per-request |
| Per-creator campaign metrics | Posts, views, ER, EMV, trend | Build it yourself |
| Aggregated campaign overview | Yes | Build it yourself |
| Content feed with per-post EMV | Yes | Raw metrics only |
| Top-post detection | Flagged by ER | Build it yourself |
| CSV export of campaign stats | Yes | No |
| Raw unaggregated feeds | No | Yes |
| Hashtag & mention monitoring | Creator-scoped | Platform-wide |
| Cost | 0.3 cr per creator per day | Raw API, priced per request |
How many creators does each API cover?
Modash’s API pages cite 380M+ profiles across Instagram, TikTok and YouTube; its platform pages carry both 350M+ and 380M+. Influencers.club cites 340M+ across 47 platforms, with full profiles on six.
Discoverable profiles by platform
The honest read: on discoverable TikTok today, Modash is ahead — 250M+ published against Influencers.club’s 23.4M contactable, and its published figure stays ahead of the 149M active TikTok creators rolling into Discovery next. Everywhere else the depth is Influencers.club’s; Modash’s published API materials (pricing, Discovery and Raw pages, docs.modash.io, reviewed August 2026) give no Instagram-specific count and document three platforms.
Which API is better: Modash or Influencers.club?
Scored on API capability only, out of 5 per category. Dashboard and campaign-suite features are excluded from both sides.
Influencers.clubModashPick the Influencers.club API when
- You want to ship before committing a year of budget — from $208/month as published, 10 free credits, no card.
- You are running data at scale and need to control cost per record. The credit meter is granular — 0.01 to discover, 0.03 to vet from the search response, 0.2 for core profile and contact data, 0.8 for audience analytics, 1 for the full record — so a large pipeline pays for exactly the slice each stage needs. Modash prices the core record one way: 1 credit, whatever you needed from it.
- You need the whole creator record in one response: profile, niche and sub-niche, audience analytics, sponsored-post history and monetization signals.
- Your creators are not confined to Instagram, TikTok and YouTube, or you need to filter by presence on other platforms.
- You are starting from a list and need batch enrichment — upload a CSV of handles, get enriched records back.
- You want campaign tracking with EMV and engagement rate delivered by webhook, without building an aggregation layer.
- You are building for LLM or agent consumption and want a first-party MCP server for the data itself.
Pick the Modash API when
- You want to search inside the content: a text or image query matched against what appears in photos and videos (creators over 10k followers, 0.025 cr/result). Nothing on Influencers.club searches the media itself.
- You want to query collaborations from the brand side — pass a brand ID, get every creator who has worked with that brand.
- TikTok depth is the constraint today — and you do not want to wait for the 149M active TikTok creators rolling into Discovery.
- You want raw, live platform feeds and have the engineering time to structure them yourself.
- You are monitoring hashtags and mentions across a platform rather than a defined creator set.
- An annual contract is not a barrier and a higher volume tier brings the per-credit rate down.
Where each falls short
Influencers.club API: no content-level AI search — natural-language search runs on profile data and filters, not vectorized media. No brand-seeded collaboration lookup; sponsored-post and past-sponsor data is per-creator. No raw-feed endpoints. Comments come per post rather than as a raw stream. A smaller discoverable TikTok base today (23.4M contactable against their 250M+) — 149M active creators are rolling into Discovery. No service health endpoint.
Modash API: annual commitment only, with no monthly or pay-as-you-go option and a sales call before you can test — a real barrier for teams evaluating. Live data requires a second annual contract. Three platforms. Limited cross-platform linking: a contacts array of bio-listed strings, with no identity-graph endpoint documented. Reverse email lookup exists, but there is no batch profile enrichment, and no cheaper contact-only or audience-only slice — contacts and audience data come only in the 1-credit report. Not in Modash’s published API documentation as of August 2026: webhooks, campaign objects, aggregated campaign metrics, income or monetization signals, or a first-party MCP server for its data API. Contact info is returned as-found; no validation status is documented.
Modash API vs Influencers.club API: FAQ
Does Modash offer a monthly API plan?
What is the difference between the two APIs?
How much does the Modash API cost?
How much does the Influencers.club API cost?
Which API returns more data per credit?
Can I get just a creator’s email without a full enrichment?
How do I vet creators without enriching all of them?
Which API has AI search, and what does each actually search?
Does the Influencers.club API support campaign tracking?
Can you track campaigns through the Modash API?
Which API has better audience analytics?
Does the Modash API support reverse lookup from an email?
How many creators can each API actually search?
Which platforms does each API cover?
Which creator API works with LLMs and AI agents?
Can I use both APIs together?
How this comparison was put together
Every price, credit cost and endpoint on this page comes from each vendor’s published pricing pages and API documentation, re-verified against the live specs and endpoints in August 2026. Scope is deliberately narrow: API capability only. Modash’s platform product includes campaign management, gifting, promo codes, Shopify integration and creator payments that Influencers.club does not offer — none of those are callable from the API, so none are scored here. If you are comparing full platforms rather than APIs, that is a different comparison and Modash does better in it.
Per-platform database figures are self-reported by each vendor and are not independently audited. Treat them as vendor claims. Audience demographics from any vendor in this category, including Influencers.club’s, are statistical estimates rather than platform-verified analytics.
This page is published by Influencers.club, so read the scoring with that in mind. Modash wins content-level AI search, TikTok depth today, brand-seeded collaboration lookup and raw feeds outright. If something here is out of date or wrong, send a correction and it will be logged with a date.
Sources
- Modash API pricing — modash.io/influencer-marketing-api/pricing
- Modash Discovery API — modash.io/influencer-marketing-api/discovery
- Modash Raw API — modash.io/influencer-marketing-api/raw
- Modash API documentation — docs.modash.io
- Influencers.club API overview — influencers.club/influencer-api
- Influencers.club MCP — influencers.club/creator-mcp
- Influencers.club pricing — influencers.club/pricing
- Influencers.club API documentation — docs.influencers.club
- Influencers.club data sourcing — influencers.club/our-data
- Influencers.club data enrichment — influencers.club/data-enrichment
Related comparisons
Try the influencers.club API with 10 free credits
No card on the trial, no annual commitment.