sitebulb vs lumar
Sitebulb vs Lumar — features, pricing, and which to choose for your SEO workflow in 2026.
Quick Verdict
You're choosing between two London-based technical SEO crawlers with vastly different approaches. Sitebulb positions itself as the visual, AI-powered auditing tool that makes technical SEO accessible to agencies and consultants. Lumar (formerly Deepcrawl) targets enterprise clients with comprehensive website intelligence and monitoring capabilities.
The fundamental difference is clear: Sitebulb excels at making complex technical issues understandable through visual reports and prioritized recommendations, while Lumar provides enterprise-grade monitoring and analytics for large-scale websites that need continuous oversight rather than periodic audits.
Feature Comparison
Sitebulb's strength lies in its visual reporting system that transforms crawl data into digestible insights. Its AI-powered hint system prioritizes issues by impact, making it easier to know what to fix first. The tool excels at one-time audits and periodic site reviews, with features like JavaScript rendering, accessibility auditing, and visual change detection that help agencies deliver clear reports to clients. Lumar operates at a different scale entirely. It provides continuous website monitoring with real-time alerts, advanced segmentation for analyzing specific site sections, and solid API access for enterprise integrations. Lumar's crawling capabilities handle massive sites with millions of pages, offering detailed analytics on crawl efficiency, server response patterns, and technical performance over time. The platform includes advanced features like log file analysis integration and custom data extraction that Sitebulb simply doesn't offer. While Sitebulb focuses on making technical SEO insights actionable for smaller teams, Lumar provides the infrastructure for enterprise SEO teams managing multiple large websites with complex technical requirements.
Pricing Comparison
Sitebulb starts at $13.50/month with a free tier that crawls up to 100 URLs, making it accessible to freelancers and small agencies. The pricing scales reasonably for mid-sized operations, with transparent tiers based on crawl limits and features. Lumar uses custom enterprise pricing with no public rates, typically starting in the thousands per month. This reflects its position as an enterprise platform where pricing depends on crawl volume, monitoring frequency, and specific feature requirements. The investment makes sense for large organizations managing multiple high-traffic websites, but it's prohibitive for smaller operations.
Best For
Sitebulb is better when you need clear, actionable technical SEO audits for client reporting, work with small to medium-sized websites, want visual reports that non-technical stakeholders can understand, or operate on a limited budget. It's ideal for agencies, consultants, and in-house teams at growing companies who need periodic deep-dive audits rather than continuous monitoring. Lumar is better when you manage enterprise-scale websites with millions of pages, need continuous monitoring with real-time alerts, require advanced segmentation and custom data extraction, or have complex integration requirements with existing enterprise tools. It's built for large organizations where technical SEO is a continuous operational concern rather than a periodic project.
The Verdict
Choose Sitebulb unless you specifically need enterprise-scale monitoring. For 90% of SEO professionals, Sitebulb's combination of powerful crawling, visual reporting, and reasonable pricing makes it the clear winner. Lumar only makes sense if you're managing massive websites where continuous monitoring justifies the significant cost premium over periodic auditing.