ClaudeSuperPower

Hyperliquid Market Data — OHLCV, Funding Rates & Positioning (Tessera) vs Recite MCP

Side by side on the facts. GitHub figures come straight from each repository; ratings come from signed-in reviewers here.

Type
Hyperliquid Market Data — OHLCV, Funding Rates & Positioning (Tessera)MCP Server
Recite MCPMCP Server
Category
Hyperliquid Market Data — OHLCV, Funding Rates & Positioning (Tessera)Finance
Recite MCPFinance
GitHub stars
Hyperliquid Market Data — OHLCV, Funding Rates & Positioning (Tessera)0
Recite MCP0
Trust score
Hyperliquid Market Data — OHLCV, Funding Rates & Positioning (Tessera)Not yet assessed
Recite MCPNot yet assessed
Community rating
Hyperliquid Market Data — OHLCV, Funding Rates & Positioning (Tessera)No reviews yet
Recite MCPNo reviews yet
Last commit
Hyperliquid Market Data — OHLCV, Funding Rates & Positioning (Tessera)Unknown
Recite MCPUnknown
Licence
Hyperliquid Market Data — OHLCV, Funding Rates & Positioning (Tessera)None declared
Recite MCPNone declared
Official
Hyperliquid Market Data — OHLCV, Funding Rates & Positioning (Tessera)No
Recite MCPNo
Source
Hyperliquid Market Data — OHLCV, Funding Rates & Positioning (Tessera)Not available
Recite MCP Repository

Highlighted cells win that row on an objective measure. Rows without a clear winner — category, licence, source — are left unmarked. A higher trust score means better auditability and maintenance, not safer code.