ASHDOCS as an alternative to API2PDF.
ASHDOCS vs API2PDF — one credit model instead of engine-by-engine billing, plus extraction and flows.
API2PDF is a thin wrapper over Chrome, LibreOffice, and wkhtmltopdf with usage-based billing per engine. ASHDOCS covers the same conversions behind one credit model, then adds what API2PDF doesn't have: structured data extraction, PII redaction, signed webhooks, and a no-code flow builder.
How does ASHDOCS compare to API2PDF feature by feature?
| Feature | ASHDOCS | API2PDF |
|---|---|---|
| HTML-to-PDF | Yes — 1 credit, Chromium render | Yes — Chrome engine, priced per MB |
| Office → PDF (DOCX/XLSX/PPTX) | Yes — /tools/office-to-pdf, 2 credits | Yes — LibreOffice engine |
| Merge / split / compress | Yes — dedicated endpoints | Merge only |
| Structured extraction (tables, schema JSON) | Yes — 2–3 credits | No |
| Bank statement parsing | Yes — CSV/XLSX with reconciliation | No |
| Predictable billing | Flat credits; failed jobs never charged | Per-engine, per-MB metering |
| Signed webhooks | Yes — HMAC-SHA256, retries | No — synchronous responses only |
| No-code flows | Yes — visual builder + Make/Zapier/n8n | No |
What are the key limitations of API2PDF?
- →API2PDF bills per engine and per megabyte, so invoice-heavy months are hard to forecast; ASHDOCS charges flat credits and never charges failed jobs.
- →No extraction of any kind — pairing API2PDF with a parser platform typically costs $99+ extra per month.
- →No webhooks — long conversions block your request thread instead of calling you back.
What does the code look like side by side?
# API2PDF
curl -X POST https://v2.api2pdf.com/chrome/pdf/html \
-H "Authorization: YOUR-KEY" \
-d '{ "html": "<h1>Hi</h1>" }'# ASHDOCS — one URL scheme for all 30 tools
curl -X POST https://www.ashdocs.com/api/v1/tools/html-to-pdf \
-H "X-API-Key: ash_test_xxx" \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{ "html": "<h1>Hi</h1>", "options": { "format": "A4" } }'How do I migrate from API2PDF to ASHDOCS?
- Replace each engine-specific endpoint (chrome/html, libreoffice/convert) with the single ASHDOCS tool slug — /tools/html-to-pdf or /tools/office-to-pdf.
- Move the `Authorization` key into the `X-API-Key` header and start with an `ash_test_` sandbox key, which never bills.
- Swap inline URL responses for the `output_files[].url` array — links are signed and expire, so store the file, not the link.
- Add a webhook destination for `job.completed` instead of holding the HTTP connection open on big files.
Frequently asked questions
Is ASHDOCS a drop-in replacement for API2PDF?+
For HTML and Office conversions, yes — the payloads are near-identical JSON. You change the auth header and the endpoint path, and remove any engine-selection logic since ASHDOCS routes internally.
How is ASHDOCS pricing different from API2PDF?+
API2PDF meters per engine and per MB. ASHDOCS charges flat credits (1 for HTML-to-PDF, 2 for Office conversion) with plans from $15/month, and failed jobs are never charged.
Can I run both during migration?+
Yes. ASHDOCS keys and webhooks are fully independent — a common pattern is routing 10% of traffic through ASHDOCS, comparing outputs, then flipping the switch.
Competitor pricing verified 1 August 2026 from the vendor's public pricing page. Pricing changes frequently — check API2PDF's pricing page for current rates before deciding.