Mockd vs WireMock
Multi-protocol mocking without the Java overhead
Feature Comparison
Side-by-side comparison of Mockd and WireMock capabilities.
| Feature | Mockd | WireMock |
|---|---|---|
| Language | Go | Java |
| Startup time | <10ms | ~5 seconds |
| Memory (idle) | <30MB | ~200MB+ |
| Free tier | Unlimited endpoints & calls | 1,000 calls, 10 req/s |
| Protocols | 7 native (HTTP, WS, GraphQL, gRPC, MQTT, SSE, SOAP) | 4 (HTTP + 3 via extensions) |
| WebSocket | Native | v4 Beta |
| MQTT | Native | No |
| mTLS matching | Yes | No |
| MCP Server (AI editors) | 18 tools | No |
| AI Mock Generation | 4 providers | No |
Why Switch from WireMock?
No Java Runtime Required
Mockd is a single Go binary. No JVM installation, no classpath issues, no garbage collection pauses. Just download and run.
Better Free Tier
WireMock Cloud charges by API calls (1,000/month free). Mockd has no limits — unlimited endpoints and unlimited calls. Use it for load testing without hitting limits.
More Protocols
WireMock supports gRPC and GraphQL via separate extension JARs, and WebSocket only in the unreleased v4 beta. mockd includes all 7 protocols natively in a single binary — no extensions, no extra JARs, no protoc step.
Faster CI/CD
At <10ms startup vs ~5 seconds for WireMock, your test suites run faster. Multiply by hundreds of test runs per day.
mTLS Support
Match requests based on client certificate identity. Essential for microservices with mutual TLS authentication.
AI Editor Integration
Mockd ships an MCP server with 18 tools so AI coding agents in editors like Cursor and Claude can create, inspect, and manage mocks directly. WireMock has no MCP integration.
Performance at a Glance
Mockd is built for speed. Here's how it compares to WireMock in real-world scenarios.
From the Blog
Ready to Switch?
Get started with Mockd in under a minute. Single binary, no dependencies.
curl -sSL https://get.mockd.io | sh