ip-api.com is good for quick no-key HTTP lookups. IPWho is better when you need HTTPS testing, 2,000 free requests/day, bulk lookup, and a paid commercial path.
The free-tier decision
Compare the three decisions that matter before moving from a quick personal lookup to a secure application workflow.
ip-api.com Free
IPWho Free
Best for developers who need secure API testing before production.
Not best if you only need quick no-key personal HTTP lookups.
Free usage is for personal projects, testing, and non-profits. Commercial usage requires a paid IPWho plan.
ip-api.com pricing and free-tier limits
Compare the free limits first, then review the published paid options for production traffic.
| Decision stage | IPWho | ip-api.com | Practical fit |
|---|---|---|---|
| Secure free testing | HTTPS, 2,000 requests/day, and full feature access. | HTTP-only, non-commercial use, and 45 requests/minute per IP. | Choose IPWho when HTTPS matters before a paid plan. |
| First commercial release | Launch: $30/year ($2.50/month) for 5,000 requests/day. | Pro: €13.30/month on annual billing for SSL, API keys, commercial use, and unlimited requests. | Pay for the capacity you need today: 5,000 requests a day, HTTPS, and full feature access from $2.50/month. |
| Steady production growth | Startup: $120/year ($10/month) for 250,000 requests/day. | Pro remains an unlimited-request commercial plan. | Choose IPWho when a known daily limit and annual spend fit your operating plan. |
IPWho Enterprise starts at $69/month on annual billing for production workloads that need guaranteed throughput and priority routing.
Run the same HTTPS integration in testing and later on paid commercial plans. There is no HTTP-only free endpoint in between.
Start from $2.50/month for 5,000 requests/day, then move to $10/month for 250,000 requests/day as usage grows.
Combine geolocation, timezone, currency, ASN and ISP, connection, and flag data in one structured response.
Request only the fields your application needs, process multiple IPs in bulk, and return single-IP results in JSON, XML, or CSV.
Why switch
When not to switch
Feature comparison for production decisions
Both services return useful geolocation data. The practical difference is how the free endpoint, commercial path, and security context fit into your application workflow.
| Comparison point | ip-api.com | IPWho |
|---|---|---|
| HTTPS before paying | Free endpoint is HTTP-only. | HTTPS access on the free plan. |
| Free-plan purpose | Non-commercial use, limited to 45 requests/minute per IP. | Personal projects, testing, and non-profits with 2,000 requests/day. |
| Commercial route | Pro adds commercial use, SSL, API keys, and usage statistics. | Paid annual plans start at $2.50/month with full feature access. |
| All features across plans | SSL, API keys, commercial use, and usage statistics are added on Pro. | The same IPWho feature set is available from free testing through paid plans. |
| Response workflow | Custom field selection, multiple response formats, and batch requests. | JSON, XML, CSV, bulk lookup, field filtering, and optional user-agent parsing. |
Migration plan
Useful next pages
ip-api.com alternative FAQ
ip-api.com’s free endpoint is mainly useful for quick HTTP lookups. IPWho includes HTTPS access on the free plan, so developers can test secure API workflows before moving to production.
IPWho is a good ip-api.com alternative if you need HTTPS, 2,000 free requests/day, full feature access, and a clear commercial upgrade path.
IPWho has a free plan with 2,000 requests/day for testing, personal projects, and non-commercial use. Commercial usage should move to a paid IPWho plan.
ip-api.com’s free tier is useful for quick no-key lookups, but it is HTTP-only, non-commercial, and limited by requests per minute. IPWho is better if you need HTTPS, daily test capacity, and production-ready API usage.
Switch to IPWho if your app needs HTTPS, commercial usage later, predictable daily limits, bulk lookup, field filtering, or multiple response formats.
Stay with ip-api.com if you only need quick personal lookups, do not need HTTPS, do not need commercial usage, and prefer a no-key endpoint.
Independent measurement data
Response time varies by location. In this five-location sample, IPWho averaged 37 ms across the listed city medians, compared with 61 ms for ip-api.com. The raw measurements are shown below so you can assess the locations that matter to your users.
| Location | ip-api.com | IPWho.org |
|---|---|---|
| Frankfurt, DE | 92 ms | 49 ms |
| Ashburn, VA, USA | 9 ms | 30 ms |
| Singapore, SG | 32 ms | 37 ms |
| Mumbai, IN | 152 ms | 30 ms |
| Los Angeles, CA, USA | 18 ms | 39 ms |
Note: Measurement figures represent median values from a sample of HTTP synthetic request measurements per city, executed via GlobalPing datacenter network probes on April 8, 2026.
Latency figures can be independently verified through the GlobalPing network.
Verify measurements vs ip-api.comThis comparison uses publicly available pricing, free-plan restrictions, commercial-use terms, feature documentation, and the measurement data shown above. Plan terms, feature availability, and response times can change, so verify current details before choosing a production service.