fastn vs Nango
An open-source integration platform where coding agents generate connectors on demand.
What Nango is good at
Open source, which is real trust rather than a marketing line: you can read exactly what a connector does before depending on it.
Broad coverage, over 800 APIs, and an unusually sharp pitch that your coding agent writes the connector just in time.
Genuinely fast for a developer who wants a connector today and is comfortable owning it.
The actual difference
Every generated connector is code you now own. Generating them faster means accumulating that ownership faster, and generation speed was never really the bottleneck; maintenance is. It is also developer-first rather than embeddable self-serve for your customers. fastn's connectors are maintained on our side and live inside your product for a customer to configure.
Choose Nango when
You want open source you can inspect and fork, your team is happy owning connector code, and the integrations are for you rather than for your customers.
Choose fastn when
You do not want to own forty connectors, and the people configuring them should be your customers rather than your engineers.
The question that settles it
After the agent writes connector number forty, who maintains all forty?
Questions people actually ask
Open source seems strictly better. Is it not?
For inspectability it genuinely is, and that matters. What open source does not change is who fixes the connector when a vendor deprecates an endpoint. With generated code in your repository, that is you.
Can we use both?
Yes, and it is a reasonable split: Nango for integrations your team owns and wants to read, fastn for the customer-facing ones you do not want to maintain.
Other comparisons
The fastest way to judge this is to connect one system and see what your customer would see.
Start free