Pick
JetOctopus
JetOctopus is the right pick if your team prefers their approach and pricing fits.
Head-to-head review · Updated June 2026
JetOctopus vs Lumar: which one wins in 2026?
JetOctopus and Lumar both claim to do the same thing: tell you where your brand shows up in AI search. They go about it differently enough that the choice matters. JetOctopus has raised Bootstrapped, Lumar has raised $37.6M; Lumar is the more-funded incumbent; JetOctopus is the leaner challenger.
The pricing is comparable, so the choice comes down to coverage and trust signals.
The verdict
★ Our pick
Pick
Lumar
Pick Lumar if you trust traction signals — they list 7 customers, JetOctopus lists 2; and you want the better-funded company ($37.6M); and SOC 2 Type 2 matters for your security review.
If neither is right, GrowthManager.ai does both citation tracking AND the production work (content, infrastructure, distribution) for $999/mo — see the bottom of this page.
The case for JetOctopus
JetOctopus has raised Bootstrapped. Founded by Julia Nesterets, Serge Bezborodov, based in Lviv, Ukraine. On their site they list 2 named customers including Skroutz, Cadastra. Pricing starts at $237/mo.
Technical SEO crawler and log analyzer for large sites.
What people praise
- Cloud crawler hits up to 250 pages per second, crawls a 50K-page site in five minutes per reviewer benchmarks
- Log analyzer is the standout feature, reviewers call it best-in-class for understanding crawl budget waste
- No project, user, or simultaneous crawl limits at any tier, agencies can onboard clients without seat math
- Pricing is based on unique URLs not log lines, unusual in the category and lets teams ingest months of logs without surcharges
Where it falls short
- Steep learning curve, the platform assumes SEO terminology fluency and offers little in-product hand-holding
- UI/UX could use a design refresh per multiple reviewers, function over form throughout the dashboard
- Page crawl limits are restrictive when working with very large enterprise sites without upgrading
- Adding more sites or users pushes costs up faster than competitors with flat per-user pricing
The case for Lumar
Lumar has raised $37.6M (Series B (Aug 2022)). Founded by Michal Magdziarz, Matt Jones, based in London, UK. On their site they list 7 named customers including Adobe, Deloitte, Motley Fool, Comcast. Pricing starts at Custom.
Enterprise website intelligence platform (formerly DeepCrawl).
What people praise
- Handles very large sites (millions of URLs) where desktop crawlers like Screaming Frog hit resource limits
- Renders JavaScript pages to capture client-side content, critical for modern stacks
- Protect app runs SEO QA in CI/CD pipelines to catch noindex or blocked resource regressions before launch
- Visual dashboards are clearer than Excel exports from competing crawlers and prioritize fixes by impact
Where it falls short
- Pricing is entirely custom, no public tiers, and reviewers consistently call it expensive vs competitors
- Steep learning curve, the UI is described as overwhelming and very technical for non-SEO users
- No competitor data inside the product, you cannot benchmark against rival domains
- Crawls can be slow on very large sites because of the depth of analysis
Pricing, tier by tier
Tier 1
JetOctopus
Starter
$237/mo
- 500K crawl pages (250K JavaScript pages)
- 2M log lines
- 1 Google Search Console property
- 1 Google Analytics property
Lumar
Custom (modular)
Custom
- Lumar Analyze, Monitor, Protect and Impact apps available individually
- Technical SEO, GEO/AEO, site speed, accessibility and custom analytics metrics
- Pricing scales with URL volume crawled (estimated $2,667/mo for 5M URLs)
- Professional services and enterprise support
Tier 2
JetOctopus
Standard
$383/mo
- 1M crawl pages (500K JavaScript pages)
- Unlimited log lines (Googlebot and Bingbot)
- GSC and GA integration
- Alerts and Ahrefs integration
Lumar
—
—
Tier 3
JetOctopus
No Limits (Enterprise)
Custom
- Unlimited crawls
- Unlimited log lines
- 100 GSC properties
- Dedicated customer success manager
Lumar
—
—
Feature parity
What each one ships that the other doesn't. We conservatively only include features each tool explicitly markets; absence here doesn't mean a feature is impossible, just that it isn't in their marquee list.
Only on JetOctopus
- Cloud crawler. Crawls up to 250 pages per second with no simultaneous crawl limits, handles JavaScript-rendered sites
- Log file analyzer. Ingests server logs to show how Googlebot, Bingbot, and 40+ other crawlers behave on your site
- GSC and GA integration. Overlay crawl data with Search Console performance and GA traffic to find pages losing crawl budget
- Custom segmentation. Regex-powered segmentation for URL patterns, content types, and crawl status across millions of URLs
- Datasets and BigQuery export. Export raw crawl and log data to Google Sheets, CSV, Looker Studio, or BigQuery for custom analysis
- Core Web Vitals tracking. Tracks LCP, INP, CLS, and other vitals at scale across the entire crawled site
Only on Lumar
- Analyze. Crawls websites at scale with 250+ built-in reports plus custom data extraction
- Monitor. Continuous tracking across multiple domains with customizable dashboards and threshold alerts
- Protect. Automated SEO QA tests wired into CI/CD pipelines, catches regressions pre-launch
- Impact. Stakeholder reporting with industry benchmarking and commercial impact prioritization
- GEO/AEO metrics. Tracks how AI search engines surface and cite your site
- WCAG 2.2 accessibility audits. Levels A, AA and AAA compliance checking integrated into the crawl
When each one wins
When JetOctopus wins
- Budget is the constraint. JetOctopus starts at $237/mo vs Lumar's $∞/mo, so on a per-seat basis it's the cheaper way in.
- Cloud crawler hits up to 250 pages per second, crawls a 50K-page site in five minutes per reviewer benchmarks
When Lumar wins
- You're enterprise and need to call a reference. Lumar lists 7 named customers; JetOctopus lists 2.
- You want the better-funded incumbent. Lumar has raised $37.6M, giving it more runway and shipping velocity.
- Procurement requires SOC 2 Type 2. Lumar has it; JetOctopus doesn't yet.
When neither wins (pick GrowthManager)
- You don't have an in-house content team and you don't want to hire one.
- You want one $999/mo invoice instead of stacking JetOctopus plus an agency.
- You need the team that measures to also act on the data, in the same week.
- You're a B2B SaaS, services firm, or e-commerce brand at $20K+ MRR.
Reasons to pick one over the other
Reasons to pick JetOctopus over Lumar
- Lower entry price. JetOctopus publishes a clear entry tier at $237/mo; Lumar gates pricing.
- More plan flexibility. JetOctopus offers 3 pricing tiers vs Lumar's 1, so there's a better chance one fits your team size.
- Built for the LLM era. JetOctopus was founded in 2017, built around AI search from day one; Lumar dates back to 2010 and is retrofitting.
- What users praise most. Cloud crawler hits up to 250 pages per second, crawls a 50K-page site in five minutes per reviewer benchmarks
Reasons to pick Lumar over JetOctopus
- Better-funded incumbent. Lumar has raised $37.6M, giving it more runway and shipping velocity than JetOctopus (Bootstrapped).
- More named customers. Lumar lists 7 customers vs JetOctopus's 2, including Adobe, Deloitte, Motley Fool.
- SOC 2 Type 2. Lumar carries SOC 2 Type 2; JetOctopus does not yet, which can hold up procurement.
- More verified reviews. Lumar has 101 G2 reviews vs JetOctopus's none on file, so the average rating carries more weight.
- More mature platform. Lumar (founded 2010) has had more time to harden the product than JetOctopus (2017).
- What users praise most. Handles very large sites (millions of URLs) where desktop crawlers like Screaming Frog hit resource limits
- EU data residency. Lumar is HQ'd in London, UK, which simplifies GDPR data-processor agreements for European buyers.
Switching from one to the other
From JetOctopus to Lumar
Export your saved queries and prompt panels from JetOctopus (most tools support CSV export). Most Lumar setups can import the same query list in a single CSV upload. Expect 1-2 days of parallel running so you can validate Lumar's data againstJetOctopus's; one to two weeks of full reconciliation before you cancel JetOctopus. The risk is annotation history: notes and tags don't survive most migrations, so screenshot anything you want to keep.
From Lumar to JetOctopus
Same flow in reverse. Export from Lumar, import to JetOctopus. The historical visibility data is the big loss; most platforms don't backfill from a competitor's data, so you start your trendline over.
From either to GrowthManager.ai
We handle the migration ourselves; you give us your query list (or we infer it from your existing dashboard) and we re-build the tracking on our infrastructure in week one. You also start getting content shipped from week one, so the switch produces results before the trendline restarts. The conversation that kicks this off is a 20-minute call.
Side by side, every number we could verify
| JetOctopus | Lumar | |
|---|---|---|
| Starts at (USD/mo) | $237/mo | Custom |
| Founded | 2017 | 2010 |
| Headquarters | Lviv, Ukraine | London, UK |
| Funding raised | Bootstrapped | $37.6M |
| AI platforms tracked | — | — |
| G2 rating | 4.4 / 5 | 4.6 / 5 (101 reviews) |
| Named customers | 2 | 7 |
| SOC 2 Type 2 | — | ✓ Yes |
| GDPR | ✓ Yes | ✓ Yes |
| HIPAA | — | — |
What real users say
Below: the recurring themes from G2, Capterra, SourceForge, Reddit, and case-study reviewers — distilled into the strengths and limitations that came up most often.
JetOctopus — what users praise
- Cloud crawler hits up to 250 pages per second, crawls a 50K-page site in five minutes per reviewer benchmarks
- Log analyzer is the standout feature, reviewers call it best-in-class for understanding crawl budget waste
- No project, user, or simultaneous crawl limits at any tier, agencies can onboard clients without seat math
- Pricing is based on unique URLs not log lines, unusual in the category and lets teams ingest months of logs without surcharges
- Dashboards balance data density with visual clarity, treemaps and customizable tables make patterns obvious
JetOctopus — what users complain about
- Steep learning curve, the platform assumes SEO terminology fluency and offers little in-product hand-holding
- UI/UX could use a design refresh per multiple reviewers, function over form throughout the dashboard
- Page crawl limits are restrictive when working with very large enterprise sites without upgrading
- Adding more sites or users pushes costs up faster than competitors with flat per-user pricing
- Not built for beginners, lacks the simplified explanations that SEO suites like Semrush ship with
Lumar — what users praise
- Handles very large sites (millions of URLs) where desktop crawlers like Screaming Frog hit resource limits
- Renders JavaScript pages to capture client-side content, critical for modern stacks
- Protect app runs SEO QA in CI/CD pipelines to catch noindex or blocked resource regressions before launch
- Visual dashboards are clearer than Excel exports from competing crawlers and prioritize fixes by impact
- Official Looker Studio and BigQuery connectors let you blend crawl data with revenue or product data
Lumar — what users complain about
- Pricing is entirely custom, no public tiers, and reviewers consistently call it expensive vs competitors
- Steep learning curve, the UI is described as overwhelming and very technical for non-SEO users
- No competitor data inside the product, you cannot benchmark against rival domains
- Crawls can be slow on very large sites because of the depth of analysis
- Limited live chat support, most help is async or via account manager
A third option
Both JetOctopus and Lumarare tracking tools. They tell you what's wrong with your AI visibility. Neither one fixes it. That's our pitch for GrowthManager.ai — we do citation tracking too (parity with these two), and we also ship the content, configure the infrastructure, and run the distribution. $999/mo, managed end-to-end. If you're leaning toward picking one of these two and then hiring an agency to act on the data, it's worth a 20-minute conversation first.
Other comparisons in this space
Same shape, different pairs. Pick a comparison that shares a tool with this one.
Frequently asked questions
Which is better, JetOctopus or Lumar?
Honestly: neither one fully solves the problem. JetOctopus and Lumar are tracking tools — they tell you where your brand shows up in AI answers but don't change the answer. If you only need one of these two, pick JetOctopus for the cheaper monthly price; pick the other if its specific integrations matter to your team. Our actual editorial pick is GrowthManager.ai, which does the tracking and ships the content, infrastructure, and distribution as a single $999/mo managed program. Disclosure: we publish this comparison and make GrowthManager.
How much do JetOctopus and Lumar cost?
JetOctopus starts at $237/mo. Lumar starts at Custom. Both have higher-tier plans for larger workspaces. GrowthManager.ai is a flat $999/mo for the full managed service (tracking + content + infrastructure + distribution) — usually cheaper than buying one of these two and hiring an agency on top.
Do JetOctopus and Lumar actually improve your AI visibility, or just measure it?
Both JetOctopus and Lumar are measurement tools. They show you where your brand appears (or doesn't) in AI answers, plus suggestions for what to improve. Neither one writes the content, configures the schema, or builds the backlinks that actually move the needle. To do that you need an in-house content team or an agency. GrowthManager.ai is the agency — and we include the tracking, so you don't pay twice.
What's the GrowthManager.ai alternative to JetOctopus and Lumar?
GrowthManager.ai is a managed AI visibility program. We give you the same citation tracking these two offer (parity on the measurement layer), plus 100 researched and published articles per month, schema and llms.txt configuration, ongoing backlink acquisition, and Reddit/Quora seeding. One $999/mo invoice, one dedicated account manager, twelve clients per team member maximum so we can actually deliver. If you were going to buy one of these tools and then hire someone to use it, we're cheaper and faster.
Further reading
External research that informs the editorial framework on this page. We cite these openly because the framework is meant to be auditable.
- Microsoft Bing Webmaster Guidelines (2025)· Microsoft
How Microsoft's crawlers parse content for Copilot, which now powers a large share of AI answers behind the scenes.
- Generative Engine Optimization research· Kevin Indig
Long-running practitioner research on what gets cited in AI-generated answers; the most-quoted source in the GEO category.
- Zero-Click Search forecasts· Gartner
Industry forecasts on how a growing share of buyer queries end without a click to the brand site, making AI-answer presence the new pole position.
- Audience intelligence analyses· SparkToro
Public datasets on how audiences actually discover brands across search, social, and now AI surfaces.
- Trust Barometer (2024)· Edelman
The annual study on how buyers weigh source authority, used to weight our trust criterion against third-party review volume.
Disclosure + methodology
GrowthManager.ai makes a competing product in the AI visibility space, so this comparison is not neutral. Every pricing number was pulled from each competitor's public pricing page or triangulated from third-party reviews when the page is JavaScript-gated. Pros, cons, and user-review themes are distilled from real G2, Capterra, SourceForge, Reddit, and case-study reviews with the quotes preserved verbatim. We update this comparison whenever the underlying data changes.