openfootball vs Jolpica-F1 (2026)
Short answer: openfootball scores slightly higher (53 vs 50). Jolpica-F1 is the better pick for Formula 1 projects, especially ones migrating from the retired Ergast API, that need free historical results and standings.
From public data checked . How we know
Choose openfootball if you…
Free / open data
Best for: Football projects that want public-domain fixtures and results as plain-text or JSON files with no key and no usage limits.
- ✓ need Football (soccer)
- ✓ need commercial use allowed in the public terms
- ✓ care most about what developers report in practice
Not ideal for: Apps needing live scores, detailed player stats or a hosted API; data is fetched from GitHub repositories and is not live.
What developers say
Free public-domain (CC0) football fixtures and results published as plain text and JSON files on GitHub, with no key needed. Developers use it for World Cup apps, prediction models and tutorials. Limits: static files rather than a live API, and Hacker News commenters debated whether its plain-text format is easy to parse.
Choose Jolpica-F1 if you…
Free / open data
Best for: Formula 1 projects, especially ones migrating from the retired Ergast API, that need free historical results and standings.
- ✓ need Formula 1, Motorsport
- ✓ value a large open-source ecosystem of wrappers and examples
Not ideal for: Commercial products needing guarantees: it is volunteer-run, rate-limited and the licence does not address the data.
What developers say
Free, volunteer-run Formula 1 API that took over from the retired Ergast service with compatible endpoints. Widely adopted: roughly thirty GitHub repos, popular F1 data-visualisation posts, and projects that integrate it for historical results and standings. Little explicit praise or criticism in discussion; no pricing or reliability complaints surfaced.
Side by side
| openfootball | Jolpica-F1 | |
|---|---|---|
| SportDex Score | 53/100 (#41) | 50/100 (#52) |
| Popularity | 36 | 33 |
| Community & reliability | 52 | Not enough data |
| Transparency | 90 | 75 |
| Developer experience | 48 | 53 |
| Type | Free / open data | Free / open data |
| Starting price | Free tier | Free tier |
| Free tier | Yes | Yes |
| Free trial | Not stated | Not stated |
| Sports | Football (soccer) | Formula 1, Motorsport |
| Data | Fixtures, Historical data, Results, Standings | Fixtures, Historical data, Results, Standings, Team stats |
| Delivery | Not disclosed | Polling only (REST) |
| Protocols | Not disclosed | REST |
| Live / in-play | No | Not disclosed |
| Commercial use | Commercial: Allowed | Commercial: not disclosed |
| Betting products | Betting: not disclosed | Betting: not disclosed |
| Documentation | Docs | Docs |
| Developer discussions | 13 | 2 |
| GitHub repos | 17 | 1.6k |
| Community tone | Neutral | Neutral |
Empty fields mean the provider does not say, not that the feature is missing.
Quick answers
- Is openfootball or Jolpica-F1 better?
- openfootball scores slightly higher (53 vs 50). Jolpica-F1 is the better pick for Formula 1 projects, especially ones migrating from the retired Ergast API, that need free historical results and standings.
- Which is cheaper, openfootball or Jolpica-F1?
- openfootball: Free tier. Jolpica-F1: Free tier. Entry plans differ in limits and coverage, so compare what each plan includes.
- Do openfootball and Jolpica-F1 have a free tier?
- openfootball: yes. Jolpica-F1: yes.