Ayrshare vs Postproxy: Comparing social media publishing APIs for developers

Both Ayrshare and Postproxy are social media publishing APIs aimed at developers who do not want to build and maintain direct integrations with every social platform. Both support multi-tenant architectures for agencies and SaaS products, both abstract OAuth token management, and both let you publish across multiple networks from a single request.

If you are evaluating them, you likely want to know where they actually differ — not a marketing features list. This article covers the real differences: pricing model, platform coverage, API design, how each handles multi-tenancy, and where one genuinely outperforms the other.

At a glance

Platform coverage

Ayrshare supports 13 platforms: X/Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, TikTok, YouTube, Threads, Pinterest, Bluesky, Google Business Profile, Reddit, Snapchat, and Telegram.

Postproxy supports 8 platforms: X/Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, TikTok, YouTube, Threads, and Pinterest.

If your application needs Bluesky, Google Business Profile, Reddit, Snapchat, or Telegram, Ayrshare covers those and Postproxy does not. This is the clearest area where Ayrshare wins outright. For teams building tools that need comprehensive coverage across newer and niche platforms, this matters.

For most publishing workflows — the core social networks where the majority of content actually gets published — both APIs cover the same ground.

Pricing

This is where the two products diverge most significantly.

Ayrshare pricing (as of early 2026):

Postproxy pricing:

The difference is substantial. For a developer or small agency managing social accounts for 10 clients:

• Ayrshare Launch: $299/month
• Postproxy Scale: $49/month

For a SaaS product managing 50 client accounts with unlimited publishing:

• Ayrshare Business: $599/month
• Postproxy Scale: $49/month (one unit) or stackable for more groups

Postproxy’s pricing counts a cross-post to multiple platforms as one post — publish to Instagram, LinkedIn, and X simultaneously, that counts as one post toward your plan limit. Ayrshare’s pricing model is profile-based rather than post-volume-based, which may work better depending on your usage pattern.

For teams in early stages building and testing: Postproxy has a free tier. Ayrshare offers a 14-day free trial.

Multi-tenant architecture and client isolation

Both APIs support multi-tenant use cases, but they approach it differently.

Ayrshare’s model uses a dual-key system: your primary API key plus a per-user Profile Key in the request headers. When a user connects their social accounts, you generate a JWT URL for them to authenticate. Subsequent API calls for that user pass their Profile Key alongside your API key.

# Ayrshare multi-user request
curl -X POST "https://api.ayrshare.com/api/post" \
  -H "Authorization: Bearer YOUR_API_KEY" \
  -H "Profile-Key: USER_PROFILE_KEY" \
  -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
  -d '{"post": "Your content", "platforms": ["instagram", "twitter"]}'

Postproxy’s model uses profile groups — isolated containers for social profiles that can each have their own scoped API key. A scoped key for Client A cannot access Client B’s profiles, posts, or data at all.

# Postproxy scoped key — only has access to one client's data
curl -X POST "https://api.postproxy.dev/api/posts" \
  -H "Authorization: Bearer CLIENT_A_SCOPED_KEY" \
  -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
  -d '{"post": {"body": "Content"}, "profiles": ["instagram", "twitter"]}'

The practical difference: with Ayrshare, your backend holds one master API key and routes requests using Profile Keys. With Postproxy, you can issue true per-client API credentials where the key itself restricts data access at the API level — not just at your application layer. For SaaS builders who want clean data boundaries without relying on application-layer filtering, this model is easier to reason about.

Publishing states and failure handling

This is where Postproxy’s design differs most noticeably from Ayrshare.

Postproxy tracks each post through explicit states:

• draft — held, not yet submitted
• pending — queued for publishing
• published — successfully delivered
• failed — delivery failed, with reason
• failed_waiting_for_retry — failed but will retry automatically

Each state is tracked per platform. A post to four platforms generates four independent outcomes. If Instagram succeeds and LinkedIn fails, the post record reflects both outcomes separately. Webhooks fire per-platform, so your application receives platform_post.published for Instagram and platform_post.failed for LinkedIn as separate events.

Ayrshare returns per-platform status in the API response and supports webhook callbacks for post status updates. The core functionality is similar — both give you per-platform outcomes. Postproxy’s state machine approach makes the full post lifecycle more explicit, which matters when you are building approval workflows or need precise audit trails.

Draft and approval workflows

Postproxy has native draft support. Posts created with "draft": true sit in a held state until explicitly published via a separate API call. This lets your application own the approval workflow — who approves, how many approvals, escalation logic — while the API provides the hold-and-release mechanism.

# Create a draft
curl -X POST "https://api.postproxy.dev/api/posts" \
  -H "Authorization: Bearer YOUR_API_KEY" \
  -d '{"post": {"body": "Pending review", "draft": true}, "profiles": ["instagram"]}'

# Approve and publish
curl -X POST "https://api.postproxy.dev/api/posts/post_id/publish" \
  -H "Authorization: Bearer YOUR_API_KEY"

Ayrshare supports draft/approval workflows with an requiresApproval flag on posts. Both APIs cover this use case.

Queue-based scheduling

Postproxy offers a queue system that goes beyond point-in-time scheduling. Queues let you define recurring timeslots (e.g., “post every weekday at 9 AM and 2 PM”) and add posts to the queue without specifying exact times. The queue assigns each post to the next available slot automatically.

Queues also support:

• Priority levels — high, medium, low posts are ordered within the queue
• Jitter — a random offset of up to 60 minutes that makes automated posting look less robotic
• Profile-specific slots — different posting schedules per platform

Ayrshare supports scheduled posts with future timestamps, but does not have a recurring-slot queue system.

For content pipelines where you want to maintain a posting cadence without specifying exact publish times for every piece of content, Postproxy’s queue approach reduces friction.

MCP server and AI integrations

Both Ayrshare and Postproxy ship MCP servers that let AI agents (Claude, Cursor, VS Code with AI plugins) publish social content directly through natural language.

Ayrshare’s MCP server provides 75+ tools across 15 API categories. Postproxy’s MCP server covers publishing, scheduling, queue management, and analytics.

For AI agent workflows where you want an LLM to manage a social media pipeline autonomously, both work. Postproxy’s queue integration through MCP is useful for agents that need to add content to a posting queue rather than publish immediately.

n8n and automation platform support

Postproxy has a native n8n node, which means Postproxy appears as a first-class integration in n8n’s node library. You can configure Postproxy triggers and actions in n8n’s UI without writing custom HTTP requests.

Ayrshare does not have a native n8n node but works via n8n’s generic HTTP request node. This is functional but requires more configuration work.

For teams building workflows in n8n where Postproxy is the publishing layer, the native node is meaningfully faster to set up and easier to maintain.

Where Ayrshare wins

Platform breadth. If you need Bluesky, Google Business Profile, Reddit, Snapchat, or Telegram, Ayrshare covers them. Postproxy does not. This is a clear and objective advantage for applications that need those networks.

Established product. Ayrshare has been in market longer and has a larger customer base. If community resources, third-party tutorials, or ecosystem integrations matter to your evaluation, Ayrshare has an edge.

Profile-based pricing for high-post-volume, low-client-count scenarios. If you publish very high volumes for a small number of clients, Ayrshare’s per-profile model may work in your favor.

Where Postproxy wins

Price. The cost difference is not marginal — it is 5–10x at comparable scale for most use cases. For startups, agencies managing 10–50 clients, and SaaS products where publishing is one feature among many, the pricing difference is significant.

Scoped API keys for true client isolation. Profile groups with per-group API keys create data boundaries at the API level rather than relying on application-layer routing. This simplifies the security model for multi-tenant products.

Queue system with slots and jitter. For content pipelines that need a posting cadence rather than specific timestamps, the queue approach is materially different from point-in-time scheduling.

Native n8n integration. If n8n is in your stack, Postproxy’s native node is faster to set up and maintain.

Per-state tracking and publish lifecycle. The explicit state machine (draft → pending → published/failed) makes it easier to build audit trails, approval workflows, and precise retry handling.

Which one to choose

Choose Ayrshare if:

• You need Bluesky, Google Business Profile, Reddit, Snapchat, or Telegram
• You are already in the Ayrshare ecosystem and switching costs are not justified
• Platform breadth is the primary requirement

Choose Postproxy if:

• Cost matters — especially at startup or agency scale
• You are building a multi-tenant product and want clean per-client data isolation
• You need queue-based scheduling with recurring timeslots
• You are building n8n workflows
• You want a simpler pricing model that does not scale by profile count

Start free with the Postproxy API — no credit card required, 2 profile groups and 10 posts to test the full integration.