Our pick for a multi-game app: TCGGraph
We prefer TCGGraph when a shared catalog, flexible queries and a path to recognition matter together. Choose JustTCG when its wider listed game coverage or condition-level pricing workflow is the closer match.
The published features, side by side
| Decision point | TCGGraph | JustTCG |
|---|---|---|
| Game coverage | 9 games | 17 games listed |
| Interface | REST + GraphQL | REST |
| Entry paid plan | $19/month · 25,000 data credits | $19/month · 10,000 requests |
| Billing model | Operation-based credits | Requests; batch sizes vary by plan |
| Recognition | Separate scan allowance | Not documented on reviewed feature page |
| Regional pricing | Cardmarket EUR + TCGplayer USD | Multi-region features in v2 beta |
Source-reported features and monthly USD plans reviewed during 9–13 September 2026. See source links below; recognition, tax, overage and limits can affect total cost.
Choose around the product you are building
A collection app has several jobs: identify the printing, render its image, show an appropriate market value and keep your identifiers consistent. A store repricing job may care much more about pulling many condition-specific values at once. These are different workloads.
TCGGraph is our first choice for the combined app workflow. JustTCG deserves a close look when the pricing operation is the product, especially if your game is outside TCGGraph’s current catalog.
Compare workloads, not headline allowances
At the same published entry price, the allowances use different units. TCGGraph charges two credits for a search. JustTCG’s paid Starter supports up to 100 cards in a batch request. A larger allowance on the pricing page does not establish which service is cheaper for your application.
Estimate lookup calls, batch sizes, refresh frequency and peak traffic separately. Then run that request mix against each provider’s limits. Treat a beta feature as a separate dependency when planning a launch.
Where the other choice makes sense
Choose JustTCG if its additional games are essential or its batching matches your inventory process. Choose TCGGraph if you value one catalog model alongside query flexibility and a separately billed scanning service. Neither conclusion establishes a latency or accuracy advantage without testing the same workload.
A practical comparison for a store and a collection app
Run two scenarios if both are part of your product. First, reprice a fixed inventory sample after deduplicating variants and applying supported batch sizes. Second, complete a collection entry from search through printing confirmation and price display. Record the full request sequence for each scenario, including requests caused by missing or ambiguous data.
A winner in the inventory job may not remove the most work from a multi-game scanner. Weight the results according to the features your users will actually use. Keep provider-specific IDs behind an adapter so a later change does not rewrite customer holdings.
Decide using evidence from your own trial
Compare mapping success, missing quotes, payload fields and the busiest request period. Use current source timestamps to distinguish a delayed refresh from a different valuation metric. Test your error states as well as your ideal examples before choosing a plan.
For the implementation details, read the inventory workflow, request scheduling guide and market-data alternatives. Our recommendation remains TCGGraph for the combined multi-game catalog brief.
Frequently asked questions
Is a larger monthly allowance necessarily cheaper?
No. A credit can represent a different operation from a request, and batching changes the work completed per request. Compare the same completed workflow.
Which would you start with for a multi-game scanner?
We recommend trialing TCGGraph for that combined scope, while separately evaluating recognition results and the actual scan costs.
Sources & review notes
Based on provider documentation reviewed during 9–13 September 2026. No independent benchmarks were performed. “Not documented” is not proof that a feature is unavailable.