Screaming Frog SEO Spider vs Sitebulb

Screaming Frog SEO Spider

Chromium WRS rendering, custom JavaScript execution, crawl comparison with staging-vs-production URL mapping for regression detection between crawls, Search Console/GA/PageSpeed integrations to check what Google actually saw, structured-data validation, and issues carrying an estimated priority based on potential impact — that's a diagnostic core, not just a list. But the evidence is silent on log-file analysis and crawl budget analysis, which are exactly what the top anchor demands, so it stops at 8.

Sitebulb

Crawling at genuine scale with JavaScript rendering through headless Chrome at no extra cost, scheduled daily, weekly or monthly crawls up to 10m URLs on the cloud edition, and indexation diagnosed rather than listed — non-self-referential canonicals, robots directives consolidated across HTML head, HTTP header and robots.txt with conflicts flagged, and full indexable-state categorisation. Audit Comparisons plus delta columns since the previous audit catch regressions between crawls, a Response vs Render report surfaces rendering differences, and hints carry prioritisation with built-in education. We found no public information on log-file analysis or crawl budget treatment, and the captured pages never state that prioritisation is by traffic impact rather than severity.

Screaming Frog SEO Spider

There is no keyword research in this product at all — no volumes, difficulty, intent or SERP feature data anywhere in the evidence, and the German-language question doesn't even arise. The only content-adjacent output is title/meta length analysis, duplicate and low-content detection, spelling in 25+ languages and optional AI prompts while crawling.

Sitebulb

Every keyword capability shown is analysis of the customer's own Google Search Console data — brand versus non-brand splits, device segmentation, clicks and CTR mapped against position for the top 10, and performance broken down by HTML template in a configurable data explorer. We found no public information on keyword discovery, search volumes, difficulty, intent classification or SERP feature analysis, and nothing on German-language keyword data in particular.

Screaming Frog SEO Spider

The tool has no proprietary ranking data and no backlink index of its own — link metrics are pulled from Majestic, Ahrefs and Moz APIs into a crawl, which is someone else's data. Nothing here for the vendor to document or be accountable for, so the floor anchor applies.

Sitebulb

Ranking performance appears only through the customer's own Search Console connection (desktop, mobile and tablet), so we found no public information on rankings the vendor collects themselves — no update frequency, accuracy methodology or location granularity attributable to the tool. We also found no public information on a backlink index of any size or refresh cadence.

Screaming Frog SEO Spider

Scheduled crawls with auto-export including Google Sheets, full command-line automation and Looker Studio crawl reports, plus GA, Search Console, PageSpeed and link-metric integrations — solid outbound plumbing. But there is no evidence the product exposes its own API; the 'API integrations' in the evidence are connections to Google and link-data providers, not an interface a team builds against, which is the gap that caps it between the 3 and 5 anchors.

Sitebulb

The output side is genuinely strong for agencies: customised PDF reports, a live Data Studio connector that refreshes dashboards on every crawl, pre-built single-site and portfolio templates with delta columns, client dashboards shareable without a Sitebulb login, Google Sheets auto-export appending 271 columns of historical audit data, and automated export to S3-compatible storage. Beyond an MCP connection into Claude and ChatGPT, however, we found no public information on a documented API with stated limits or per-endpoint costs.

Screaming Frog SEO Spider

The desktop deployment model makes exit nearly moot: crawls are saved and reopened as files on the customer's own machine via a disk-based storage engine, so the history never ends with the subscription, and spreadsheet/bulk exports are unmetered and unlimited under the licence. That fully meets the open-format bulk export anchor and exceeds it on retention; only the absence of API-based mirroring keeps it from 10.

Sitebulb

Crawl history travels with the customer: bulk CSV and XLSX exports cover every audit metric including the historical series, automated to a local folder, cloud drive or Google Sheet on every scheduled crawl, and a share file lets any other user import the entire audit. The S3 route beyond the 1M rows of the standard export is limited to certain Cloud plans through a sales contact, and we found no public information on any retention period after cancellation.

Screaming Frog SEO Spider

GB contracting entity under English law, data stored in UK and US data centres with transfers outside the EEA explicitly confirmed, and no subprocessor list — only 'assurances' that DPAs will be in place. It sits above the floor anchor because hosting locations and transfer scope are at least disclosed, and the crawl data itself never leaves the customer's machine (the vendor holds only licence and usage data), but non-EU entity plus US transfers plus unnamed subprocessors is nowhere near rubric level 3.

Sitebulb

The contracting entity is Sitebulb Limited, a UK company (Company No. 12125600, Biddenden, Kent) outside the EU, with crawls running on unnamed cloud servers. We found no public information on where cloud crawl data is hosted, on the infrastructure provider, or on any subprocessor list.

Screaming Frog SEO Spider

A flat £199/$279 per user per year with published bulk tiers (£189 at 5-9 licences, £179 at 10-19, £169 at 20+), a 1-year term, and no metered keyword, crawl or API credits to hide behind because crawling is unlimited within the licence — the annual invoice is trivially computable for any team size. The only unstated item is VAT treatment, which is what keeps it off the top anchor.

Sitebulb

Headline prices and the main crawl limits are public — Lite at $18 /month with 10,000 URLs per audit, an additional Pro user at $11 per month, 15% off yearly plans, and Cloud plans "starting from £95/month". But the Cloud ladder is otherwise resolved only as going "up in excess of £20k/year for big teams", we found no public information on a Pro tier price, the S3 export add-on is priced through a sales contact, and we found no public information on VAT treatment — so a realistic annual invoice is not computable.