fastn vs Merge
A unified API for common integrations, now positioning around AI infrastructure.
What Merge is good at
A fast start on the common connectors through one unified schema, which is genuinely less work than integrating each vendor separately.
Strong category brand and real, published time-saved proof points.
Well documented, so an engineer can evaluate it properly before committing.
The actual difference
The unified schema is the whole product and also the whole constraint. It is fixed, so a customer's custom fields, custom objects or deeper access do not fit it, and those cases fall back to your engineers. fastn is public and documented in the same way, but each customer's integration configures to their own fields and workflow, so variation never becomes your code.
Choose Merge when
Your customers' data genuinely is uniform, the standard objects cover it, and one schema across many vendors is worth more than per-customer depth.
Choose fastn when
Your customers customise their systems, and the edge cases are the ones your largest deals depend on.
The question that settles it
What happens in Merge when a customer's custom object does not fit the schema?
Questions people actually ask
Is a unified schema not simpler?
It is, right up to the first customer whose setup does not match it. The question is not whether a unified schema is easier on day one, it is who absorbs the mismatch on day one hundred. With a fixed schema that work returns to your team as custom code.
Does fastn have a unified surface too?
Yes, and it is documented in the same way. The difference is that fitting it to a customer's own fields is configuration a customer does, rather than a schema extension you wait for.
Other comparisons
The fastest way to judge this is to connect one system and see what your customer would see.
Start free