haro vs terkel
HARO vs Terkel — features, pricing, and which to choose for your SEO workflow in 2026.
Quick Verdict
HARO (now Connectively) and Terkel represent two different approaches to digital PR and link building. HARO pioneered the journalist-source matching space in 2008, building a massive network through its free daily email digest. Terkel launched as a premium alternative in 2020, focusing on higher-quality matches and streamlined expert sourcing for busy professionals.
The core difference comes down to volume versus curation. HARO sends everyone the same three daily emails packed with hundreds of opportunities, while Terkel uses AI matching to deliver personalized, relevant queries directly to your dashboard.
Feature Comparison
HARO operates on a broadcast model — journalists submit queries, and thousands of sources receive the same daily digest emails. You manually scan through 50-100+ queries per email to find relevant opportunities. Response rates are typically low due to high competition, but the volume is unmatched. Connectively's recent AI upgrade helps with some categorization, but you're still doing most of the filtering work. Terkel flips this model with personalized matching. Their AI analyzes your expertise profile and only shows relevant opportunities. You get maybe 3-10 highly targeted queries per week instead of 200+ random ones. Terkel also provides response templates, tracks your pitch success rate, and offers direct communication with publishers. Their expert verification process means less competition per query — often 5-10 responses versus HARO's 100+ responses per query. Quality control differs significantly. HARO accepts any journalist query, leading to inconsistent opportunity quality and occasional spam. Terkel vets both publishers and experts, maintaining higher standards but limiting total volume.
Pricing Comparison
HARO remains free for sources, making it accessible to anyone. Journalists pay for premium features like advanced search and priority placement. This freemium model built HARO's massive user base but contributes to inbox overload. Terkel starts at $99/month for their basic plan, positioning itself as a premium service. The paid model means fewer sources competing for each opportunity, potentially increasing your success rate. For agencies or consultants landing even one high-value client mention monthly, the ROI justifies the cost. However, individual contributors or small businesses might find the pricing steep compared to HARO's free access.
Best For
HARO works best for sources with time to manually filter opportunities and patience for low response rates. If you can dedicate 15-30 minutes daily to scanning emails and have expertise across multiple topics, HARO's volume advantage pays off. It's also ideal for businesses just starting with digital PR who want to test the waters without financial commitment. Terkel suits busy professionals, agencies, and consultants who value efficiency over volume. If your time is worth more than $100/month and you prefer 5 highly relevant opportunities over 50 random ones, Terkel delivers better ROI. It's particularly valuable for niche experts who struggle to find relevant HARO queries in the daily flood.
The Verdict
Choose HARO if you're budget-conscious and have time to manually filter opportunities. Despite the noise, it remains the largest journalist-source network with unmatched query volume. Choose Terkel if you want curated, relevant opportunities and can justify the monthly cost. For most marketing professionals and agencies, Terkel's efficiency gains outweigh the price difference, but HARO's free tier makes it worth running alongside any paid platform.