Edge Hound vs Referee.chat
A side-by-side comparison built from both listings. Blank cells mean the company has not given that detail; we never guess.
Edge Hound compared with Referee.chat
| Detail | 
Edge Hound | 
Referee.chat |
|---|
| What it does | AI decision intelligence layer for capital markets that delivers explainable trade ideas and market research
| An AI panel debates your goal; a referee rules on re-checkable evidence
|
|---|
| Stage | Not given
| Not given
|
|---|
| Founded | Not given
| Not given
|
|---|
| Based in | BG
| Not given
|
|---|
| Pricing model | Freemium
| Freemium
|
|---|
| Pricing | Free tier and paid subscription plans available. Free trial of 7 days offered for new subscribers.
| Free: $1.00 starting credit once. Credit plans from $10 top-up with no expiration. Your own key: 5% infrastructure fee after the first $5.00 of usage.
|
|---|
| Key features | - Customizable widgets with iFrame or web component integration
- Programmable API layer for custom agents and workflows
- Audit trails and model governance for regulated markets
- Real-time market data integration including filings and earnings calls
- Multi-agent reasoning architecture
- Community Discord for self-directed investors
| - Panel of up to six AI models from different vendors
- Referee rules on re-checkable evidence only
- Searches academic databases: arXiv, OpenAlex, Crossref, Europe PMC
- Executes Python code to verify claims
- Customizable acceptance standards
- Matches pause and resume without losing work
- Shared ledger prevents re-derivation
- Spending limit per match
|
|---|
| What makes it different | - Autonomous AI agents that research and evaluate trades instead of just providing data or chat
- Thesis-driven trade ideas with conviction levels, not generic signals
- Built for regulated markets from inception with compliance infrastructure
- Already in production with measurable impact on engagement and retention
- Measurable alpha with lower drawdowns compared to Buy & Hold
| - Referee decides on evidence, not argument quality
- Panel from different vendors fails in different directions
- Stuck is a targeted question, not model thrashing
- Cost grows with ledger, not round count
- Published matches become research record
|
|---|
| Community votes | 0 | 0 |
|---|
| DR (Domain Rating by Ahrefs) | 20 ▼ −1 (down) since last check | 2 ● no change since last check |
|---|
| Trust Flow (Majestic) | 7 | 0 |
|---|
| Citation Flow (Majestic) | 27 | 13 |
|---|
| Referring domains (Majestic) | 133 | 31 |
|---|
5 details filled in for both companies.
More alternatives to Edge Hound More alternatives to Referee.chat