whats-best.ai
Search Sign in

SEO

Semrush

Rest of world Report an error

Panel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars

Category median

Sovereignty: not determined

0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.

by Semrush Holdings, Inc. · www.semrush.com

Compare with Ryte → Compare with Ahrefs → Compare with SISTRIX → Report an error on this page Is this your product? →

Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.

The In-House SEO Lead

Weighted verdict

Owns organic traffic for one large German site and reports on it monthly. Wants German-language keyword data that is not an afterthought, rankings she can defend when they disagree with Search Console, and audit findings specific enough to become a developer ticket.

Same scores as the panel view — this lens weights them the way this judge cares.

Scored by The In-House SEO Lead

Crawling & technical audit

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.

Report an error

The In-House SEO Lead

The audit modules go deep — crawlability and indexability, redirects, canonicals, structured data, Core Web Vitals measured against Google's published good and poor values at the 75th percentile, mobile rendering parity, even AI-crawler access — and the Enterprise tier promises multi-million-page crawling, which matters at my scale. But we found no public information on crawl page limits per plan, scheduled crawl cadence, log-file analysis or prioritisation by traffic impact, and nothing that turns findings into a diagnosis with regression tracking between crawls. 2 4 8

Report an error

Keyword research & content guidance

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.

Report an error

The In-House SEO Lead

Volume, difficulty, CPC and traffic estimates, SERP feature coverage including AI Overviews and the Local Pack, on-page gap recommendations and keyword cannibalisation analysis are all documented, on a database of 26.4 billion keywords across 142 geo databases with history back to 2012. We found no public information on intent classification, topic clustering, competitor gap analysis or content briefs, and nothing on the depth of the German-language data — for the site I run, that gap decides whether planning happens here or elsewhere. 2 5 6 9

Report an error

Rank tracking & index quality

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.

Report an error

The In-House SEO Lead

Daily position updates at city and country level on desktop and mobile, unpersonalized results, published index sizes of 43 trillion backlinks and 808 million domain profiles, and documented calculation details such as capping average position at 21 beyond position 20 — that is a rank tracker whose numbers I can largely defend. What the captured pages do not document is a backlink refresh cadence, lost-and-found link detection, or any handling of disagreements against Search Console, which is the conversation I have every month. 5 6 7 8 9 10

Report an error

Reporting, integrations & API

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.

Report an error

The In-House SEO Lead

This is the strongest area for a team like mine: API v3 and v4 with per-endpoint unit prices (keyword metrics at 20 API units per request), a checkable unit balance, OAuth 2.0, MCP for AI tools, and white-label reporting priced as an add-on at €19.18/mo. We found no public information on data-warehouse or BigQuery export, v4 is still in Early Access with pricing subject to change while v3 is deprecated, and tools with external users are routed to sales. 2 5 9 10

Report an error

Data portability & exit

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.

Report an error

The In-House SEO Lead

Ranking history back to January 2012 is retrievable via the API in JSON or CSV, and the terms grant thirty days after suspension to back up stored data. But every export request is metered in API units, use is limited to internal business purposes, cached data may not be kept beyond one month without written consent, and on account deletion the vendor may delete everything with no responsibility — so continuously mirroring my multi-year history is not something the captured terms allow. 5 9 11

Report an error

European sovereignty

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.

Report an error

The In-House SEO Lead

The contracting entity is a Delaware corporation in Boston, and the privacy policy confirms transfers of personal data to the United States and to affiliates, with Standard Contractual Clauses as the safeguard; an EU joint controller in Prague exists. We found no public information on hosting location or EU data residency options, and the named subprocessors cover merchandise delivery and marketing tags rather than the core crawl and analytics chain. 3 11

Report an error

Pricing transparency

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.

Report an error

The In-House SEO Lead

Plan limits are concrete — 5 to 40 websites and 500 to 5,000 daily tracked keywords, with API access from Advanced — additional users start at €43/mo, reporting add-ons are exactly priced, and the terms state fees are exclusive of taxes. We found no public information on crawl page limits per plan, overage rates or a minimum term, and the captured facts give no headline subscription figure for the tiers themselves. 2 5 11

Report an error

European sovereignty — proven facts

0 of 4 dimensions proven

Built only from facts shown on the vendor's own pages. A dimension we could not prove is left open, not scored as zero.

Ownership Not determined ⚠ unverified — uncited Report an error
Data residency Not determined ⚠ unverified — uncited Report an error
Subprocessors Not determined ⚠ unverified — uncited Report an error

Where this could be wrong

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.

Do you know more about Semrush? Tell us Report an error on this page

Sources (12)

The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.

  1. 1 Vendor homepage www.semrush.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 +1 earlier capture: 11 Sep 2026 Details →
  2. 2 Pricing www.semrush.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 +3 earlier captures: 11 Sep 2026, 2 Sep 2026, 2 Sep 2026 Details →
  3. 3 Privacy policy www.semrush.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
  4. 4 Crawling & technical audit — found from sitemap www.semrush.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
  5. 5 Keyword research & content guidance — found from sitemap developer.semrush.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
  6. 6 Keyword research & content guidance — found from sitemap www.semrush.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
  7. 7 Rank tracking & index quality — found from sitemap developer.semrush.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
  8. 8 Rank tracking & index quality — found from sitemap www.semrush.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
  9. 9 Reporting, integrations & API — found from sitemap developer.semrush.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
  10. 10 Reporting, integrations & API — found from sitemap www.semrush.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
  11. 11 Data portability & exit — found from sitemap www.semrush.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
  12. 12 Data portability & exit — found from sitemap www.semrush.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →