Screaming Frog SEO Spider vs Sitebulb

Screaming Frog SEO Spider

The crawler itself is diagnostic, not a checklist: unlimited URLs bounded only by my own memory and disk, Chromium rendering, structured-data and canonical/noindex diagnosis, per-issue priority based on potential impact, crawl comparison surfacing what changed between crawls and staging-vs-production mapping, with bulk error exports literally framed as 'send to a developer'. Search Console and PageSpeed Insights data pulled per URL satisfies the anchor-8 comparison clause, but no log-file analysis or crawl-budget reporting is evidenced, so I can't set the spider's view against what Googlebot actually fetched.

Sitebulb

This is the core of the product and it shows: 300+ prioritised hints with built-in education, headless-Chrome JavaScript rendering, scheduled daily-to-monthly crawls at real scale (500,000 URLs per audit on desktop, up to 10 million on Cloud), and canonical and robots-directive diagnosis detailed enough to become a developer ticket. Search Console integration layers real query data onto audits and audit comparisons track whether fixes landed between snapshots. We found no public information on log-file or crawl-budget analysis, which is the gap that matters for a site our size.

Screaming Frog SEO Spider

As a keyword tool it doesn't exist: no volumes, difficulty, intent, SERP features or German-language keyword database appear anywhere in the features list — my German keyword planning would need an entirely separate product. The only content functionality is page-level hygiene: duplicate and thin-content detection, title/description length analysis, and spell check in 25+ languages.

Sitebulb

Everything keyword-shaped here is my own Search Console data re-cut — brand vs non-brand, device splits, performance by HTML template, clicks and CTR by position — useful for monthly reporting but not keyword research. We found no public information on proprietary volumes, difficulty, intent classification or SERP-feature data for any market, German included, and content guidance stops at a duplicate content check and a spell checker.

Screaming Frog SEO Spider

There is no proprietary ranking or backlink data at all: rank tracking is absent from the evidence, and backlink metrics are pulled from Majestic, Ahrefs and Moz APIs rather than any index the vendor owns or documents. Nothing here can agree or disagree with Search Console because it produces no rankings to compare.

Sitebulb

There is no proprietary ranking or backlink data to hold to account: every ranking view in the captured pages is Search Console data pulled in at audit time, with device segmentation as the only granularity. For a second opinion I can defend when the numbers disagree with Search Console, we found no public information on any data of the vendor's own.

Screaming Frog SEO Spider

Scheduled crawls with auto-export to any location including Google Sheets, automated Looker Studio crawl reports, and GA, Search Console and PageSpeed Insights integrations get crawl data in front of stakeholders in my monthly chain. But the API story is inbound only — connecting to third-party APIs — with no documented API of its own with stated limits, and no white-label or data-warehouse export, so it sits at the 5 anchor rather than 8.

Sitebulb

The data-out story is strong: a live Data Studio connector with pre-built single-site and multi-client portfolio templates, dashboards clients can view without a Sitebulb login, automated historical pushes to Google Sheets, and S3-compatible export beyond the 1M-row standard limit, plus an MCP connector into Claude and ChatGPT. We found no public information on a documented API with stated limits or per-endpoint costs, or on white-label branding, and the S3 export is an add-on on certain Cloud plans via sales contact.

Screaming Frog SEO Spider

Crawl history lives on my own disk by design — save/open crawls, bulk and scheduled exports to CSV and Google Sheets, a disk-based storage engine, and no credit metering — so open-format export of the full archive while licensed is complete. The caveat is that 'Save & Open Crawls' is a licensed feature and the free version restricts saving crawls, so the native crawl files need the paid app to read and post-cancellation access to the archive is not stated.

Sitebulb

History is genuinely portable: bulk export of historical audit data covering all 271 metrics in CSV and XLSX, whole-audit share files importable by any other user, machine-to-machine project transfer, and automated export folders that run alongside scheduled audits. The S3 path above the 1M-row cap is a sales-contact add-on on certain plans, and we found no public information on a retention period or grace window for the archive after cancellation — that is what separates this from an exit designed for.

Screaming Frog SEO Spider

Contracting entity is GB under English law, my licence and purchase data sit in UK and US data centres with explicit transfers outside the EEA, and subprocessors are unnamed beyond a promise of DPAs — squarely rubric level 0-3 territory. Partial credit because the desktop model keeps crawl data on my own machines, with third-party sharing only where I initiate it and Google user data 'not accessible or shared by us', so my site strategy never leaves my infrastructure.

Sitebulb

The contracting entity is Sitebulb Limited, a UK company at an address in Kent, Company No. 12125600 — outside the EU for procurement purposes. We found no public information on hosting location, data residency, ownership or any subprocessor list on the captured pages.

Screaming Frog SEO Spider

The annual invoice is computable from public pages alone: £199/$279 per user per year, published volume tiers down to £169, explicit per-user licensing, a stated one-year term, and no metering of any kind since paid crawls are unlimited up to my own memory and storage. Only the VAT treatment of the quoted price isn't spelled out, which keeps it short of 10.

Sitebulb

Desktop is legible: Lite at $18/month with 10,000 URLs per audit, an extra user at $11 per month, a 15% yearly discount and stated payment terms, though we found no public figure for the Pro plan itself. Cloud is the problem — "plans starting from £95/month, and going up in excess of £20k/year" with no tier ladder visible — the S3 export add-on is contact-sales only, and we found no public information on VAT treatment, so a cloud invoice is not computable from the captured pages.