LlamaParse vs Nanonets-OCR
Nanonets-OCR is cheaper per page; Nanonets-OCR is faster; only LlamaParse supports bounding boxes; only Nanonets-OCR supports forms.
LlamaParsellamaindex/llamaparse | Nanonets-OCRnanonets/nanonets-ocr | |
|---|---|---|
| Type | OCR API | Open source |
| Price | 5 credits / page | 2 credits / page |
| Per 1,000 pages | $5.00 | $2.00 |
| Typical speed | 3.0 s / page | 1.8 s / page |
| Best for | RAG ingestion | Markdown with semantic tags |
| Inputs | PDF, images, DOCX | PDF, images |
| Languages | 80+ languages | Multilingual |
| Max pages per request | 1,000 | 500 |
| Tables | ✓ Yes | ✓ Yes |
| Handwriting | No | No |
| Math | ✓ Yes | ✓ Yes |
| Bounding boxes | ✓ Yes | No |
| Confidence | No | No |
| Forms | No | ✓ Yes |
| Multilingual | ✓ Yes | ✓ Yes |
| On OCRRouter | Coming soon | Coming soon |
Prices are what you pay on OCRRouter. Speed is the provider's typical figure, not a benchmark we ran.
What each one is
Nanonets-OCR
Open image-to-Markdown model that tags tables, equations, signatures, watermarks and checkboxes.
Nanonets-OCR detailsUse one, fall back to the other
Request body
{
"model": "llamaindex/llamaparse",
"fallbacks": ["nanonets/nanonets-ocr"],
"file_url": "https://example.com/document.pdf"
}