Head to head
Churnkey vs Site Rep MCP
Same numbers we show everywhere else, lined up. Ratings come from users, the grade comes from our scanner, adoption comes from public registries.
No reviews yet
Read and manage Churnkey cancel flows, retention metrics, and payment recovery
Full listing
No reviews yet
Read-only Site Rep handoff: agent brief, pending work, first-customer receipt with payment evidence.
Full listingThe short version
Neither has been reviewed yet, so the comparison rests on the scan and the public usage numbers. The safety scan favours Churnkey (100/100 against 57). Churnkey has noticeably more public adoption.
| Churnkey | Site Rep MCP | |
|---|---|---|
| User rating | No reviews yet | No reviews yet |
| Safety grade | A100/100 | C57/100 |
| Adoption | Growing | New |
| GitHub stars | 22 | – |
| Downloads / week | – | – |
| Runs where | Hosted (remote) | Hosted (remote) |
| Gateway-ready | Yes | Yes |
| Tools | — | — |
| Write actions | — | — |
| Price per call | Free | Free |
| Licence | MIT | — |
| Last release | 2026-09-10 | — |
| Category | Finance | Finance |