SEO
CognitiveSEO
Provenance unknown Report an error0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by CognitiveSEO · cognitiveseo.com
Report an error on this page Is this your product? →
Link to this page
Add ?theme=dark to the image address for dark backgrounds.
The badge shows the category and the month of the latest evaluation, and EU-Made where
that is the product’s provenance. It never shows a score.
CognitiveSEO at a glance
- Vendor
- CognitiveSEO
- Headquarters
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026
- Data hosting
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026
- Free plan
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026
- Panel verdict
- The AI panel rates CognitiveSEO 2.5/5, the mean of 6 judges. CognitiveSEO is an SEO platform scored here across technical audit, keyword and content, rank and index data, reporting and API, data portability, sovereignty and pricing transparency. how scores are made
- As of
- Vendor pages captured 13 Oct 2026; evaluated by the panel 15 Oct 2026. all sources
Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The panel's verdict
CognitiveSEO is an SEO platform scored here across technical audit, keyword and content, rank and index data, reporting and API, data portability, sovereignty and pricing transparency. It is strongest on technical audit, the only criterion where minimum and maximum both read 6 — a crawler from 100 pages to unlimited with JavaScript crawling and scheduled recrawls — and on reporting and API at 6 to 7, built on white-label dashboards, client users and a documented command API, though the captured pages give different figures for when the API unlocks. Weakest are pricing transparency at 0 to 1, with no tier price, seat cost or overage rate on any captured page, and sovereignty at 0 to 2, with no sovereignty attributes on record. The clearest split is rank and index data at 4 to 6: the documented tracking core scored well with some judges, while others counted the backlink index against it, no public information covering its size, refresh or methodology. Data portability ran 3 to 5 for the same reason: API history export exists, documented exit terms do not.
Speaks for it
- Crawler documented from 100 pages to unlimited at 10 to 30 URLs per minute, with JavaScript crawling, selectable user agents and weekly, biweekly or monthly recrawls.
- Health score on a 1-100% scale with a Top 3 recommended-fixes list and side-by-side comparison between two crawl dates.
- Rank tracking configurable daily or weekly on Google, Bing or Yahoo, desktop or mobile, universal or local, with history charts back to the first day each keyword was tracked.
- White-label dashboards with a custom logo and subdomain, client and colleague users with limited or full access, and automated personalised PDF reports.
- Documented API spanning link analysis, rank tracking, social visibility and campaign management, with credits included by default in each subscription.
Held against it
- No tier price, per-seat cost, overage rate or headline monthly figure appears on the captured pages, so an annual invoice cannot be computed from public information.
- No sovereignty attributes are on record — we found no public information on hosting location, contracting entity, subprocessors or a data-processing agreement.
- We found no public information on backlink index size, refresh cadence or collection methodology.
- Export runs to per-table CSV, an.xls keyword list and API history commands, with no public information on any retention period after cancellation.
- We found no public information on log-file or Search Console comparison, structured-data validation, or prioritising issues by traffic impact.
Best for
- You run an agency across many client sites and need white-label dashboards, client users with limited or full access and automated PDF reports.
- You audit large or JavaScript-heavy sites and want a crawler that scales from 100 pages to unlimited, with selectable user agents and password-protected staging crawls.
- You track a keyword set daily or weekly on Google, Bing or Yahoo and want history charts back to the first day each keyword was tracked.
- You have the discipline to mirror history out through API commands continuously, since retrieval depends on an active subscription and managed credits.
Avoid if
- You must compute an annual cost from public prices before committing — the captured pages publish no tier figures, seat costs or overage rates.
- Your procurement requires a data-processing agreement, subprocessor list or stated hosting location — we found no public information covering any of these.
- Your decisions lean on backlink data quality — we found no public information on index size, refresh cadence or collection methodology.
- You need one consistent statement of when the API key unlocks — the captured pages give Premium Subscription in one place and higher-cost and custom subscriptions in another.
The scores
| Criterion | Panel median |
|---|---|
| Crawling & technical audit | 3 of 5 |
| Keyword research & content guidance | 3 of 5 |
| Rank tracking & index quality | 2.5 of 5 |
| Reporting, integrations & API | 3 of 5 |
| Data portability & exit | 2 of 5 |
| European sovereignty | 0.5 of 5 |
| Pricing transparency | 0.5 of 5 |
Crawling & technical audit
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Site crawling at real scale: what the crawler finds, how deeply it checks, whether Core Web Vitals and indexation problems are diagnosed rather than merely listed.
0 — No site crawler; the product is keyword data only.
3 — A crawler with a low page cap that reports broken links and missing tags, with no prioritisation and no rendering of JavaScript.
5 — Scheduled crawls at a stated page limit, JavaScript rendering, issue categories with severity, and Core Web Vitals pulled per template.
8 — Log-file or Search Console integration to compare what the crawler sees against what Google fetched, indexation and canonical diagnosis, structured-data validation, and issues prioritised by traffic impact rather than count.
10 — The audit is diagnostic rather than a list: crawl budget analysed, rendering differences surfaced, regressions detected between crawls with the deploy that caused them inferrable, and remediation guidance specific enough for a developer ticket.
The In-House SEO Lead
The crawler runs to an unlimited page count on scheduled recrawls with JavaScript rendering, selectable user agents and staging support, and the issue set — canonicals, hreflang, orphan pages, sitemaps, status codes — is specific enough for developer tickets, with crawl-vs-crawl comparison and Top-3-fix recommendations adding diagnostic shape. We found no public information on Search Console or log-file integration, structured-data validation, or prioritisation by traffic impact, and page speed shows as slow/fair categories rather than Core Web Vitals per template. 2 8
The Agency Owner
The crawler runs 100 pages to unlimited with JavaScript rendering, scheduled recrawls weekly to monthly, issue categories feeding a one-to-hundred health score, canonical and hreflang checks, a compare-crawls view and a Top 3 fixes list — real mid-table substance for forty sites. We found no public information on log-file or Search Console data to check what Google actually fetched, crawl budget analysis, structured-data validation, or issues ranked by traffic impact, so remediation stays a list rather than a diagnosis. The PageSpeed key being one I supply myself is handy for staging but the guidance is not developer-ticket specific. 2 8 1
The Technical SEO
The crawler is real and configurable — JavaScript crawling, recrawls weekly to monthly, 100 pages to unlimited, selectable user agents, robots.txt handling, and password-protected staging crawls — with a health score and Top 3 fixes giving some prioritisation, and Compare Crawls showing changes between two crawl dates, which is the right instinct. But we found no public information on log-file or Search Console comparison, structured-data validation, or prioritisation by traffic impact, so this reads as a well-featured audit list rather than a diagnosis. 2 8
The Content Strategist
Scheduled recrawls, JavaScript rendering, a stated crawl range of 100 pages to unlimited, issue categories rolled into a health score, canonical and hreflang checks, plus crawl-versus-crawl comparison and top-3-fixes prioritisation. We found no public information on log-file or Search Console integration, structured-data validation, or issues weighted by traffic impact, so this is a well-organised list rather than a diagnosis. 2 8
The Data Analyst
Scheduled recrawls at weekly, biweekly or monthly cadence, JavaScript crawling, selectable user agents, staging-directory authentication and a side-by-side crawl comparison make this a real crawler, and the page range is published as 100 to unlimited. What holds it back is diagnosis: page speed arrives in coarse very-slow, slow and fair buckets or via the customer's own PageSpeed Insights key, and we found no public information on Search Console or log-file comparison, structured-data validation, or Core Web Vitals per template. Top 3 fixes are prioritised, but nothing ties that priority to traffic impact. 2 8
The Skeptic
The crawler states a real envelope — 100 to unlimited pages, 10 to 30 URLs per minute, recrawls weekly to monthly — with JavaScript crawling, severity folded into a 1-100% health score built on errors and warnings, Top 3 recommended fixes, and crawl-to-crawl comparison between two dates. We found no public information on log-file or Search Console comparison, structured-data validation, or issues weighted by traffic impact rather than count, which is what separates a diagnostic audit from a long list. 2 8
Keyword research & content guidance
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Keyword discovery, intent classification, SERP feature analysis and on-page guidance — judged on the depth of the German-language data as much as the English.
0 — A keyword list with volumes from one source and no intent or difficulty signal.
3 — Volume and difficulty for major markets, with thin or stale German data and no SERP feature detail.
5 — Keyword research with volume, difficulty and intent across German and other EU markets, SERP feature presence, and basic on-page recommendations.
8 — Topic clustering, competitor gap analysis, SERP composition tracked over time, content briefs with entity coverage, and cannibalisation detection.
10 — Research and guidance close the loop: opportunity sized against realistic traffic, content scored against what currently ranks rather than against a keyword density heuristic, and recommendations that reference the specific pages in the customer's own site.
The In-House SEO Lead
Keyword Explorer delivers volume, 0-100 difficulty and brand/informational/commercial intent with topic grouping, and Content Assistant flags missing keywords and stuffing against a live URL, which is usable on-page guidance. I found no public information on SERP feature detail, cannibalisation detection, or any statement about German-language data depth, and the content score is keyword-coverage driven rather than scored against what currently ranks. 3 4
The Agency Owner
Volume, a zero-to-hundred difficulty score and a three-way intent split of brand, informational and commercial are documented, topic clustering exists, and Content Assistant grades a page against keyword groups with green, orange and red markup — genuine on-page guidance rather than a density counter. We found no public information on SERP feature analysis, cannibalisation detection, or the depth of the German-language data beyond a localized search option, and the top 20, 50 or 100 Ranking Analysis is the only SERP composition on show. 3 4 5
The Technical SEO
Volume, a 0-to-100 difficulty scale, brand/informational/commercial intent classes and topic clustering are documented, and the Content Assistant grades a page against used, under-used and stuffed keywords, which is decent on-page guidance. We found no public information on SERP feature presence, the depth of the German-language data, cannibalisation detection or competitor keyword gaps, which are exactly what separates a keyword list from guidance here. 3 4
The Content Strategist
We found no public information on SERP feature composition, cannibalisation detection, entity coverage in briefs, or the depth of German-language data. 1 3 4
The Data Analyst
Keyword Explorer brings volume, a 0-to-100 difficulty score, brand, informational and commercial intent classes, question and related-keyword suggestions and topic grouping, and the Content Assistant scores text semantically with keyword-usage markup. We found no public information on the depth of German-language data, on competitor keyword gap analysis, or on cannibalisation detection. Scoring still leans on usage heuristics — green for used, red for stuffing — rather than scoring the customer's own pages against what currently ranks. 3 4
The Skeptic
Keyword Explorer shows monthly volume, a 0-100 difficulty scale and brand, informational and commercial intent with topic clustering, and Content Assistant grades a page against keywords it is missing with a readability score and a content performance score tied to rankings. We found no public information on SERP feature detail, competitor gap analysis, entity-level briefs or cannibalisation detection, and nothing on the depth of German-language data beyond a generic location dropdown. 3 4
Rank tracking & index quality
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
The proprietary data: ranking accuracy and frequency, backlink index size and freshness. Scored on what the vendor documents about their own data, because nothing here can be verified from outside.
0 — Rankings and backlinks with no stated update frequency, no country or device granularity, and no documentation of how either is collected.
3 — Weekly rankings for one country and device, a backlink index with no stated refresh cadence or size.
5 — Daily rankings with country, language and device selection, local results, and a backlink index with a documented crawl frequency.
8 — Rankings at stated frequency across many locations including city-level, SERP feature attribution, backlink index size and refresh published, lost-and-found link detection, and historical data retained for the life of the account.
10 — The vendor is accountable for their own data: methodology documented, index size and freshness published and updated, historical rankings retained and exportable in full, and discrepancies against Search Console explained rather than hidden.
The In-House SEO Lead
Tracking runs daily or weekly across Google, Bing and Yahoo with desktop/mobile and universal-or-local selection, and history charts run back to when tracking started, which is what I need month to month. We found no public information on backlink index size, crawl or refresh cadence, ranking methodology, or how discrepancies against Search Console are treated, and the Google indexation and malware check is metered through separate one-time credits. 5 6 8
The Agency Owner
Rankings are documented at a daily or weekly cadence on Google, Bing and Yahoo, desktop and mobile, universal or local, with history charts running back to the full tracked period and new-and-lost link alerts including a dedicated API command — an honest, documented core. We found no public information on the size or refresh cadence of the backlink index, the methodology behind the cognitiveSEO PageRank metric, SERP feature attribution, or city-level granularity. The indexation and malware check metered in credits scaled to referring subdomains is a cost coupling I cannot evaluate on the evidence. 5 8 6 2
The Technical SEO
Rank tracking granularity is documented honestly: daily or weekly updates, desktop and mobile, universal or local, Google, Bing or Yahoo, supported country codes, and lost-and-found link alerts. What is not published is anything about the vendor's own backlink index — no size, no refresh cadence, no methodology — and no SERP feature attribution or city-level tracking, so accountability for the proprietary data is unverifiable. 5 8 10
The Content Strategist
Tracking is daily or weekly by choice across Google, Bing and Yahoo with device, country-code and universal-or-local selection, new-and-lost link alerts, and history charts running to the full tracking period. We found no public information on the size or refresh cadence of the backlink index, on methodology, on SERP feature attribution, or on city-level tracking. 5 7 8
The Data Analyst
Rank tracking runs daily or weekly on Google, Bing or Yahoo, desktop or mobile, universal or local, with charts stretching back to the first day each keyword was tracked and new/lost link detection in both the interface and the API. Accountability for the proprietary data is where it thins out: we found no public information on backlink index size, refresh cadence, or how rankings and links are collected. The Google indexation check is metered through one-time credits per 1000 referring subdomains rather than documented as a data-quality guarantee. 5 6 8
The Skeptic
Rank tracking is documented plainly: daily or weekly frequency configurable from the dashboard, desktop and mobile, Google, Bing or Yahoo, universal or local level, with history charts running to the full tracked period and new-and-lost link alerts. The backlink index is the half no buyer can check, and here we found no public information on index size, refresh cadence, collection methodology or how discrepancies against Search Console are treated, which holds this below the mid anchor. 5 6 8
Reporting, integrations & API
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Getting the data out and in front of someone: dashboards, white-label reporting for agencies, Search Console and analytics integration, and an API a team can build on.
0 — On-screen views only; export is a manual CSV and there is no API.
3 — Scheduled PDF reports and CSV export, one analytics integration, no API worth building against.
5 — Customisable dashboards, scheduled reports, Search Console and analytics integration, and a documented API with stated limits.
8 — White-label reporting with client access, data-warehouse or BigQuery export, multi-site and multi-client management, and an API with credit costs published per endpoint.
10 — The tool is a data source rather than a destination: full historical export in open formats, a versioned API with a deprecation policy, integrations the vendor maintains, and reporting an agency can hand a client unedited.
The In-House SEO Lead
Custom dashboards with shareable locked URLs, automated PDF reports, white-label subdomains, multi-user access and a documented 22-command API covering links, rank tracking and campaigns make this genuinely buildable for reporting. We found no public information on a Search Console integration or warehouse export, and no public per-endpoint credit costs — extra credits come by emailing support — while the captured pages give different figures for when API access begins. 5 7 8 10
The Agency Owner
White-label with a custom logo and subdomain, client and colleague accounts with limited or full access, one account dashboard spanning every campaign, shareable dashboard URLs and automated personalised PDF reports are the multi-client machinery I rebill against, and it is all documented. The API carries named commands across link, rank and social data with per-subscription credits and an error log, though the captured pages place it at higher-tier subscriptions, and we found no public information on per-endpoint credit costs, Search Console integration, or warehouse and BigQuery export. Usage history visible for only the last 30 days is thin for auditing what an integration actually did. 8 5 10 7
The Technical SEO
White-label with a custom subdomain, client users with limited or full access, automated PDF reports, a widget dashboard and a documented 22-command API covering link analysis, rank tracking, social visibility and campaign history make a working agency stack. We found no public information on Search Console or data-warehouse integration, and API credits are described per subscription with extra credits only available by emailing support, not priced per endpoint. 7 8 10
The Content Strategist
Customisable dashboards with configurable refresh, automated PDF reports, Google Analytics widgets, white-label branding with client users and shareable dashboard links, and a documented API of 22 commands with credits included per subscription and 30 days of usage history. We found no public information on Search Console integration, per-endpoint credit costs are not published, and no data-warehouse export is evidenced. 5 7 8 10
The Data Analyst
A documented API with 22 commands across link analysis, rank tracking, social visibility and campaign management, 30 days of usage history and an error log is something a team can build on, and white-label dashboards, client users and shareable URLs cover the agency workflow. The captured pages describe API availability differently — starting with the Premium subscription in one place, enabled for higher-cost and custom subscriptions in another — and we found no public information on per-endpoint credit costs, with each subscription including an unstated number of credits and more available by email to support. We also found no public information on Search Console integration, warehouse or BigQuery export, rate limits, or a deprecation policy. 7 8 10
The Skeptic
Dashboards are genuinely customisable — Google Analytics widgets, annotations, a live HTML widget for third-party metrics, sharing by unique URL — plus automated personalised PDF reports, white-label with a custom subdomain, and client users with limited or full access, which covers the agency case. The API is documented with its full command list and default-included credits, but we found no public information on Search Console integration, warehouse or BigQuery export, or credit costs per endpoint, and additional credits are requested by email to support. 5 7 8 10
Data portability & exit
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether the ranking and crawl history — the only thing a multi-year subscription actually accumulates — remains the customer's when they leave.
0 — No bulk export; history is visible in the interface and nowhere else, and ends with the subscription.
3 — CSV export of current views only, with historical data capped or unavailable in bulk.
5 — Bulk export of rankings, keywords and crawl results including history, via interface or API.
8 — Complete historical export in open formats without credit metering that prices it out of reach, plus a documented retention period after cancellation.
10 — Exit is designed for: the full account exportable including every historical data point, API access sufficient to mirror the data continuously, and a stated grace period during which the archive remains retrievable.
The In-House SEO Lead
Export is per-table CSV and a keyword list in.xls, with API history commands for links and keyword campaigns on top. We found no public information on bulk export of full ranking or crawl history, or on any retention period after cancellation, and API access is tied to higher tiers with the captured pages giving different figures on when a key can be enabled. 3 5 8 10
The Agency Owner
CSV export is per table, keyword suggestions go out as xls, and the API exposes campaign history, links and new-and-lost links, so a disciplined team could mirror rank history continuously — if they sit on the right subscription and manage credits. We found no public information on bulk export of crawl results, a documented retention period after cancellation, or a full-account export in open formats, so only part of the multi-year history is provably mine on the way out. 5 3 10 7
The Technical SEO
Table data exports to CSV, keyword lists to.xls, and the API exposes campaign history, keyword campaigns and lost-and-found links, so historical data is retrievable while the account is alive. Bulk crawl-result export and any retention period after cancellation are the gaps — we found no public information on post-cancellation retention, and API access starts at the Premium plan and is credit-metered. 3 5 9 10
The Content Strategist
Table-level CSV export, a full keyword-list download in Excel format, and API commands returning campaign links, new-and-lost links and campaign history give genuine exit paths, though API access starts at the Premium subscription and indexation credits are one-time purchases that do not refresh. We found no public information on bulk historical export of crawl results or on any retention period after cancellation. 3 5 7 10
The Data Analyst
CSV and xls export plus API history commands for keyword campaigns, links and new/lost links mean multi-year history is at least mechanically retrievable while the subscription is alive. That retrieval is metered: the API starts at the Premium subscription and draws on subscription credits, so a full export is priced into the tier rather than guaranteed. We found no public information on a complete account export in open formats, on crawl-result export, or on any retention period after cancellation. 5 9 10
The Skeptic
Export is the interface kind: CSV of the current table for rank data, an.xls of the full keyword suggestion list, and API commands that can pull campaign links, new-and-lost links and keyword campaign history. We found no public information on bulk export of historical crawl results, on complete export in open formats, or on any retention or grace period after cancellation — the exit terms are undocumented. 3 5 9 10
European sovereignty
panel opinion
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Where the account and crawl data live and who the contracting entity is. Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline; weighted lower here than in categories holding personal data, because an SEO tool mostly holds the customer's own strategy rather than their customers' identities.
0 — Non-EU vendor and contracting entity, hosting unstated, subprocessors unnamed, and site or user data of unclear scope leaving the EU.
3 — EU hosting offered as an option while the contracting entity is non-EU, or the subprocessor list is absent.
5 — EU hosting as standard and an EU contracting entity, but parts of the chain are non-EU without an explained safeguard.
8 — EU hosting on named infrastructure, EU contracting entity, subprocessor list published, and any analytics or Search Console data handling described with its legal basis.
10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: vendor, entity, hosting and every subprocessor European, certification published, and a DPA that covers the crawl and analytics data the tool ingests.
The In-House SEO Lead
No sovereignty attributes are on record: we found no public information on hosting location, contracting entity, subprocessors, or a DPA covering the crawl and Google Analytics data the tool ingests. For a product that mostly holds my own strategy rather than my customers' identities that leaves the whole question open rather than answered. 1
The Agency Owner
We found no public information on hosting location, the contracting entity, a subprocessor list, certification, or a data processing agreement covering the crawl and analytics data the tool ingests — everything this category needs is silent. An SEO tool mostly holds my clients' strategy rather than their end users' identities, so I weight this lightly, but silence on where the account data lives is still silence. 1 10
The Technical SEO
No sovereignty attributes are on record: we found no public information on hosting location, the contracting entity, subprocessors, certification or a data-processing agreement covering the crawl and analytics data the tool ingests. In the absence of any of this, there is nothing that evidences where account and crawl data live. 1
The Content Strategist
No sovereignty attributes are on record: the vendor pages captured say nothing about hosting location, contracting entity, certification or subprocessors, so where the account and crawl data live and under whose law is entirely unevidenced. 1
The Data Analyst
Nothing is on record here: we found no public information on hosting location, contracting entity, subprocessors, certification, or a data-processing agreement covering the crawl and analytics data the tool ingests — even the pages describing Google Analytics authorization and crawling are silent on where that data resides. An entirely unevidenced posture leaves the buyer assuming residency and legal basis rather than the vendor committing to them. 1 8
The Skeptic
We found no public information on where accounts and crawl data are hosted, on the contracting entity, or on any subprocessor list. Nothing in the captured pages evidences jurisdiction, certification, or data-processing terms covering the crawl and analytics data the tool ingests, which is what the lowest anchor describes. 1
Pricing transparency
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
The category where the headline price is least often the invoice. Whether a buyer can compute the real annual cost including keyword limits, crawl credits, API units, extra users and client seats — from public pages alone.
0 — No public prices at all; every tier is a sales conversation.
3 — A monthly headline exists, but keyword limits, crawl credits or the cost of an additional user are unstated — the invoice is unknowable.
5 — Tier prices public with the main limits given, but at least one commonly needed piece (extra seats, API credits, historical data) is unpriced or metered opaquely.
8 — Every tier priced publicly with keyword, crawl and API limits, overage rates, per-seat costs, minimum term and VAT treatment stated.
10 — Complete price computability: annual invoice derivable for a given keyword count, crawl volume, API usage and team size, with overage and every credit cost published.
The In-House SEO Lead
We found no public prices on any captured page — no tier amounts, seat costs or overage rates — while the metering that drives the invoice is real: indexation checks consume separate one-time credits scaling with referring subdomains, and extra API credits are requested by emailing support. A real annual cost is not derivable from the public pages alone. 1 6 10
The Agency Owner
We found no public prices at all in the captured pages — not even a monthly headline per tier — so the annual cost for forty rebilled sites is not computable from public pages, which is exactly the margin problem I screen out. The credit machinery is documented, with one indexation credit covering up to 1000 referring subdomains, extra credits one-time and never refreshed, user counts limited by subscription and the API placed at the Premium subscription, but no credit carries a public price and more credits come from emailing support. Per-seat cost, minimum term and VAT treatment are unstated. 6 10 8 3
The Technical SEO
We found no public prices on any captured page — no tier figures, no per-seat cost, nothing to compute an annual invoice from — and extra API credits route through an email to support. The only limit mechanics documented are structural: one Google Indexation Credit per 1000 referring subdomains, one-time use without refresh, and user counts limited by subscription, which describes metering but not money. 6 8 10
The Content Strategist
We found no public price information at all — no tier prices, no headline figure, no per-seat or overage costs. The credit mechanics are described in detail (one indexation credit covers a site with up to 1000 referring subdomains, extra credits are one-time and non-refreshing, rankings depth and user counts vary by subscription), but nothing attaches a price to any of it, so an annual invoice cannot be computed. 6 8 10
The Data Analyst
We found no public information on tier prices, per-seat costs, overage rates, minimum term or VAT treatment — not even a headline monthly figure. What is published is metering mechanics: one Google indexation credit per 1000 referring subdomains, extra credits usable once and not refreshed, and API credits bundled by subscription with more available by email to support. None of this lets a buyer compute an annual invoice. 6 10
The Skeptic
No tier price, seat cost or overage rate appears anywhere in the captured pages, so an annual invoice cannot be computed from public information. The metering is at least partly legible — subscriptions carry credits covering analyzed websites, research credits, tracked keywords, alerts and users, Google Indexation Credits are consumed at one per website with up to 1000 live linking subdomains with extras one-time and never refreshed — and the captured pages give different figures for when the API unlocks, Premium versus higher-cost and custom subscriptions. 6 8 10
Questions about CognitiveSEO
Is CognitiveSEO European?
Not determined: the vendor’s pages as captured do not say where CognitiveSEO is based.
Where does CognitiveSEO store data?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026.
Does CognitiveSEO have a free plan?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026.
What are the best alternatives to CognitiveSEO?
As of 21 Oct 2026, the panel rates SE Ranking (3/5), Semrush (3/5) and SISTRIX (3/5) highest among the other 32 SEO products evaluated. Ratings that look equal are rounded to half stars; the order uses the unrounded rating, then the name. The highest-rated European alternative is SISTRIX (EU-Made). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made. The full list, with European products first: CognitiveSEO alternatives.
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 13 Oct 2026. Vendors change pricing and policies without notice; every fact reflects its source as of the capture date shown in the registry.
- AI can misread a source. Extraction and judgement are automated; a citation guarantees traceability, not infallibility. If something here is wrong, say so — no account needed, every report is decided within 5 business days, and accepted corrections are published.
What we left out
A claim that does not survive our checks costs us the claim, not the page. This is what was taken off this one.
- We found no public information on compliance on the pages we read (cognitiveseo.com, support.cognitiveseo.com/knowledgebase/site-audit, support.cognitiveseo.com/knowledgebase/keyword-tool-documentation, support.cognitiveseo.com/knowledgebase/how-can-i-improve-my-content-performance-score, support.cognitiveseo.com/knowledgebase/rank-tracking, support.cognitiveseo.com/knowledgebase/how-do-google-indexation-credits-work and 4 more). If the vendor publishes it somewhere else, send us the page. Know more? Tell us
- 4 product facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 1 integrations fact could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and was left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 6 of the readings below were written against an earlier fact sheet — a fact has been corrected, added or pulled since. Until the panel next runs on this product you are reading the older judgement. Know more? Tell us
Sources (10)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor page cognitiveseo.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 2 Crawling & technical audit — found from sitemap support.cognitiveseo.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 3 Keyword research & content guidance — found from sitemap support.cognitiveseo.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 4 Keyword research & content guidance — found from sitemap support.cognitiveseo.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 5 Rank tracking & index quality — found from sitemap support.cognitiveseo.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 6 Rank tracking & index quality — found from sitemap support.cognitiveseo.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 7 Reporting, integrations & API — found from sitemap support.cognitiveseo.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 8 Reporting, integrations & API — found from sitemap support.cognitiveseo.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 9 Data portability & exit — found from sitemap support.cognitiveseo.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 10 Data portability & exit — found from sitemap support.cognitiveseo.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →