| Ecosystem | 0 | 0 |
| Match Graph | 0 | 0 |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| Capabilities | 12 decomposed | 9 decomposed |
| Times Matched | 0 | 0 |
Automatically extracts structured data from unstructured earnings call transcripts and SEC filings (10-K, 10-Q, 8-K) using NLP-based document parsing and entity recognition. The system identifies key sections (management discussion, guidance, risk factors) and normalizes formatting across different filing formats and company styles, enabling downstream analysis on standardized data structures rather than raw text.
Unique: Combines domain-specific NLP (trained on financial language patterns) with SEC filing schema knowledge to extract not just raw text but semantically meaningful sections (guidance vs. risk vs. historical performance), rather than generic document parsing that treats all text equally
vs alternatives: Faster than manual transcript review and more accurate than regex-based keyword extraction because it understands financial document structure and disambiguates forward-looking statements from historical data
Applies fine-tuned sentiment classification models to earnings transcripts, management commentary, and analyst Q&A sections to quantify management tone, confidence levels, and risk perception. The system uses transformer-based models (likely BERT or similar) trained on financial language corpora to detect nuanced sentiment beyond simple positive/negative polarity, including hedging language, uncertainty markers, and shifts in tone across different speakers (CEO vs. CFO).
Unique: Uses financial-domain fine-tuned models rather than general-purpose sentiment classifiers, enabling detection of hedging language, uncertainty markers, and management confidence shifts that generic models would miss. Likely includes speaker attribution (CEO vs. CFO tone differences) and section-level analysis rather than document-level aggregation.
vs alternatives: More accurate than simple keyword-based sentiment (which conflates 'risk' mentions with negative sentiment) because it understands financial context and can distinguish between neutral risk disclosure and actual management concern
Analyzes the potential impact of earnings announcements on a user's portfolio, aggregating earnings data, sentiment, and price predictions across all holdings. The system calculates portfolio-level exposure to earnings events (e.g., 'your portfolio has 5 earnings announcements in the next week') and estimates potential portfolio volatility or returns based on individual stock predictions. May include scenario analysis (e.g., 'if all earnings beat, portfolio return is +2%') and correlation analysis between holdings.
Unique: Aggregates earnings data and predictions across a user's entire portfolio to provide portfolio-level risk assessment, rather than analyzing individual stocks in isolation. Includes scenario analysis and correlation analysis to estimate portfolio-level impact.
vs alternatives: More comprehensive than individual stock analysis because it shows how earnings events across multiple holdings interact and impact overall portfolio risk, enabling better risk management decisions
Enables export of earnings data, sentiment scores, and predictions in standard formats (CSV, JSON, Excel) for integration with external tools (spreadsheets, trading platforms, custom analysis tools). May include API endpoints for programmatic access to earnings data and real-time data feeds. Supports integration with popular platforms (TradingView, Interactive Brokers, etc.) via webhooks or native integrations.
Unique: Provides multiple export formats and integration points (API, webhooks, native integrations) to enable flexible data access and workflow integration, rather than forcing users to work within the platform's UI. Likely includes rate limiting and authentication for secure API access.
vs alternatives: More flexible than platform-only analysis because it enables integration with external tools and custom workflows, but requires more technical setup than using the platform's built-in features
Aggregates sentiment signals from multiple sources (earnings transcripts, analyst reports, social media, news articles, options market data) into a unified sentiment score or signal. The system likely uses weighted averaging or ensemble methods to combine heterogeneous data sources, with configurable weights reflecting data quality, timeliness, and predictive power. Integration points may include APIs for news aggregation (Bloomberg, Reuters), social media sentiment (Twitter/X, StockTwits), and options market data (implied volatility, put/call ratios).
Unique: Combines earnings-specific sentiment (domain-trained models) with broader market sentiment (news, social, options) using weighted ensemble methods, rather than treating all sentiment sources equally. Likely includes source quality weighting and temporal decay to prioritize recent, high-quality signals.
vs alternatives: More comprehensive than earnings-only analysis because it captures institutional positioning (options) and retail sentiment (social media) alongside management commentary, providing a fuller picture of market perception
Compares actual reported earnings metrics (EPS, revenue, guidance) against consensus estimates and historical trends to quantify the magnitude and direction of surprises. The system retrieves consensus estimates from data providers (FactSet, Bloomberg, Yahoo Finance API), calculates surprise ratios (actual vs. estimate), and flags statistically significant deviations. May include anomaly detection to identify unusual patterns (e.g., massive beats on revenue but misses on guidance) that warrant deeper investigation.
Unique: Combines consensus estimate comparison with anomaly detection to flag not just magnitude of surprises but also unusual patterns (e.g., beat on revenue but miss on guidance, or guidance cut despite earnings beat), which are more predictive of price movement than simple surprise magnitude
vs alternatives: More actionable than raw earnings data because it contextualizes results against expectations and flags anomalies that might signal hidden issues or opportunities, rather than requiring manual comparison of reported vs. consensus numbers
Generates forward-looking probability scores or confidence levels for stock price movements following earnings announcements, based on machine learning models trained on historical earnings data, sentiment signals, surprise metrics, and price action. The model likely uses gradient boosting (XGBoost, LightGBM) or neural networks to combine multiple features (earnings surprise, sentiment, volatility, sector trends) into a single prediction score. Outputs may include directional probability (likelihood of up/down move), magnitude estimates (expected % move), and confidence intervals.
Unique: Combines earnings-specific features (surprise, guidance, sentiment) with market microstructure data (volatility, options pricing) in an ensemble ML model, rather than using simple heuristics or single-factor models. Likely includes confidence intervals and feature importance to help traders understand model uncertainty and drivers.
vs alternatives: More sophisticated than simple earnings surprise heuristics because it accounts for market context (volatility, sector trends) and historical patterns, but less transparent than rule-based systems, making it harder to validate or adjust for regime changes
Enables users to create custom watchlists of companies and set rule-based alerts for earnings events, sentiment thresholds, or price movements. The system likely uses a rules engine to evaluate conditions (e.g., 'alert me if earnings surprise > 10% AND sentiment score > 0.7') and triggers notifications via email, SMS, or in-app push. Watchlist data is persisted in a user database, and alerts are evaluated in real-time or on a scheduled basis as new earnings data arrives.
Unique: Combines earnings-specific data (surprise, sentiment, guidance) with user-defined rules and real-time evaluation, enabling traders to automate their monitoring workflow without manual checking. Likely includes alert history and performance tracking to help users refine their rules.
vs alternatives: More flexible than simple earnings announcement alerts because it allows rule-based combinations of multiple signals (surprise + sentiment + price action), reducing false positives and enabling more sophisticated trading strategies
+4 more capabilities
Executes SQL queries against Supabase PostgreSQL instances through the Model Context Protocol, translating natural language or structured query requests into parameterized SQL statements. Uses MCP's tool-calling interface to expose database operations as callable functions with schema validation, enabling LLM agents to perform CRUD operations, joins, and aggregations with automatic connection pooling and credential management through Supabase client SDK.
Unique: Exposes Supabase PostgreSQL as MCP tools with automatic credential injection from Supabase client SDK, eliminating manual connection string management and enabling seamless LLM-to-database queries within Claude or compatible agents
vs alternatives: Tighter integration than generic SQL MCP servers because it leverages Supabase's built-in authentication and connection pooling rather than requiring separate database credential configuration
Exposes Supabase Auth session state and user metadata through MCP tools, allowing agents to inspect current authentication context, retrieve user profiles, and trigger auth-related operations. Integrates with Supabase's JWT-based auth system to validate sessions and access user claims without re-authenticating, using the Supabase client's built-in session management.
Unique: Integrates Supabase's JWT-based auth system directly into MCP tool interface, allowing agents to inspect and act on auth state without managing separate credential stores or re-authentication flows
vs alternatives: More seamless than generic auth MCP servers because it leverages Supabase's built-in session management and avoids redundant credential passing between agent and auth system
Invokes Supabase Edge Functions (serverless TypeScript/JavaScript functions) through MCP tools, passing parameters and receiving results with optional streaming support. Uses Supabase's edge function HTTP API to trigger functions with automatic authentication headers and response parsing, enabling agents to execute custom business logic without embedding it in the agent itself.
Supabase scores higher at 42/100 vs EarningsEdge at 41/100. EarningsEdge leads on adoption and quality, while Supabase is stronger on ecosystem.
Need something different?
Search the match graph →© 2026 Unfragile. Stronger through disorder.
Unique: Exposes Supabase Edge Functions as MCP tools with automatic authentication and response parsing, allowing agents to invoke custom serverless logic without managing HTTP clients or credential injection
vs alternatives: More integrated than generic HTTP MCP tools because it handles Supabase-specific authentication, error handling, and response formatting automatically
Subscribes to real-time changes on Supabase tables through MCP's event streaming interface, using Supabase's PostgreSQL LISTEN/NOTIFY mechanism to push INSERT, UPDATE, and DELETE events to agents. Maintains persistent WebSocket connections and filters events by table and row-level policies, enabling agents to react to database changes without polling.
Unique: Bridges Supabase's PostgreSQL LISTEN/NOTIFY real-time system with MCP's tool interface, enabling agents to subscribe to database changes without managing WebSocket connections or event serialization
vs alternatives: More efficient than polling-based approaches because it uses Supabase's native real-time infrastructure rather than repeated database queries
Manages files in Supabase Storage buckets through MCP tools, supporting upload, download, list, and delete operations with automatic authentication and path-based access control. Uses Supabase's S3-compatible storage API with built-in support for public/private buckets and signed URLs for temporary access, enabling agents to handle file I/O without managing cloud storage credentials.
Unique: Exposes Supabase Storage's S3-compatible API as MCP tools with automatic authentication and signed URL generation, eliminating the need for agents to manage cloud storage credentials or generate temporary access tokens
vs alternatives: More integrated than generic S3 MCP tools because it leverages Supabase's built-in bucket policies and authentication rather than requiring separate AWS credentials
Performs semantic similarity searches on vector embeddings stored in Supabase PostgreSQL using pgvector extension, translating natural language queries into embedding vectors and executing cosine/L2 distance searches. Integrates with embedding providers (OpenAI, Cohere) or uses pre-computed embeddings, enabling agents to retrieve semantically similar documents or records without full-text search limitations.
Unique: Integrates pgvector directly into MCP tools with automatic embedding generation and distance calculation, enabling agents to perform semantic search without managing separate vector database infrastructure
vs alternatives: More efficient than external vector databases (Pinecone, Weaviate) for Supabase users because it colocates embeddings with relational data, reducing network latency and simplifying data synchronization
Exposes Supabase database schema information through MCP tools, allowing agents to discover table structures, column types, constraints, and relationships without manual schema documentation. Queries PostgreSQL information_schema and Supabase metadata tables to dynamically generate schema descriptions, enabling agents to construct valid queries and understand data relationships.
Unique: Queries Supabase's PostgreSQL information_schema directly through MCP tools, enabling agents to dynamically discover and adapt to database schemas without pre-configured schema definitions
vs alternatives: More flexible than static schema definitions because it reflects live database state, including recent migrations or schema changes
Enforces Supabase Row-Level Security policies within agent queries, ensuring that agents can only access rows permitted by RLS rules defined in the database. Evaluates policies based on authenticated user context (JWT claims, user ID) and applies WHERE clause filters automatically, preventing unauthorized data access at the database layer rather than application layer.
Unique: Delegates authorization enforcement to PostgreSQL RLS policies rather than implementing authorization in agent code, ensuring that data access rules are centralized and cannot be bypassed by agent logic
vs alternatives: More secure than application-level authorization because RLS is enforced at the database layer, preventing accidental data leaks even if agent code has bugs
+1 more capabilities