txtfetch vs AWS Textract

AWS Textract is aws-native ocr and document analysis, billed per 1,000 pages. Here's an honest comparison: pricing math, capabilities, and where each tool wins.

at a glance

AWS Textract

Billing
per 1,000 pages (feature-stacked)
Rate used below
$0.0015/page
Free tier
1,000 pages/month free (first 3 months of your AWS account only).

txtfetch

Billing
per document, regardless of page count
Rate used below
flat monthly quota (see plans)
Free tier
500 documents/month, free, ongoing (Hobby plan)

capability table

CapabilityAWS Textracttxtfetch
Billing unitper 1,000 pagesper document
Format coveragePDF, PNG, JPEG, TIFF only615 formats (Apache Tika, checked)
OCR for scans / images++
Table extraction++*
Complex layout fidelity~~*
Structured field extraction+not yet*
Self-hosted option*
Single HTTP endpoint~+

Vendor-published benchmarks are marked directional throughout. See sources below. * txtfetch notes: Tables come back as structured rows and cells, not flattened text. Use ?format=markdown for GFM pipe tables, or ?format=json for table elements with a cells array. Output is clean linear or structured text, not a visual layout reconstruction. That's by design, but worth knowing. Structured markdown and element-JSON document output ship today (?format=markdown / ?format=json). Schema-defined field extraction means pulling typed fields per your own schema. That feature is on the roadmap, not shipped yet. We won't claim it early. No shipped self-host or VPC artifact today. It is on the roadmap. Apache Tika itself is free to run yourself. See the page below for what that takes.

Weighing self-hosting against either API? See what running Apache Tika yourself actually takes.

the cost calculator

Per page vs per document, worked out.

A 300-page PDF is 300 units of billing to AWS Textract. It's one document to txtfetch. Adjust the numbers to your own workload.

AWS Textract

Detect Document Text: OCR ($1.50 per 1,000 pages, US West Oregon, first 1M) · $0.0015/page

txtfetch

AWS Textract's figure is their cheapest OCR/base tier — forms, tables, and higher-fidelity models cost more on top. txtfetch bills a flat monthly document quota: the page count inside a document doesn't change your bill.

where textract wins

  • If you're already on AWS, it's the path of least resistance: IAM, VPC, and billing are already wired up.
  • Purpose-built forms and table analysis work at scale, covering key-value pairs and structured tables.
  • Per-feature pricing lets you pay only for what you use.
  • Proven at very large volumes with AWS's operational guarantees around the rest of the stack.

where txtfetch wins

  • Breadth: 615 formats, each with a real Apache Tika parser behind it. That's checked against the exact build we run, not a curated list of a dozen file types.
  • One HTTP endpoint. Pass a URL or upload a file, and get text back. No SDK and no async job polling required.
  • Priced per document, so a 300-page report doesn't cost 300x a one-pager.
  • A durable free tier (500 documents/month, ongoing) rather than a time-boxed trial.

What we don't claim yet: schema-defined structured field extraction, or an uptime SLA. Those ship later. See the capability table above.

next step

Ready to switch? See what your code looks like after migrating from AWS Textract: the call you run today, the call that replaces it, and a drop-in adapter.

sources

Check the numbers yourself.

The benchmark runs against a committed corpus. You can re-run it.

See the benchmarks →

Get an API key →