★ Our pick
Pick
Lumar
Pick Lumar if you want the better-funded company ($37.6M); and SOC 2 Type 2 matters for your security review.
Head-to-head review · Updated June 2026
Lumar vs Raven Tools: which one wins in 2026?
Lumar and Raven Tools 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. Lumar has raised $37.6M, Raven Tools has raised Acquired by TapClicks (2017); Lumar is the more-funded incumbent; Raven Tools is the leaner challenger.
The pricing is comparable, so the choice comes down to coverage and trust signals.
The verdict
Pick
Raven Tools
Raven Tools is the right pick if your team prefers their approach and pricing fits.
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 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
The case for Raven Tools
Raven Tools has raised Acquired by TapClicks (2017) (Acquired April 2017). Founded by Jon Henshaw, Scott Holdren, based in Nashville, TN. On their site they list 5 named customers including Voltage, Bear Group, Vertical Rail, True North Digital Marketing. Pricing starts at $49/mo.
Agency-focused SEO reporting and white-label dashboard.
What people praise
- Single sign-on pulls client Google Analytics, Search Console, and Google Ads into one dashboard, which agencies repeatedly call out as the main reason they stay.
- Moz and Majestic backlink data are bundled into every plan, so agencies do not need separate $99+/mo Moz or Majestic subscriptions.
- WYSIWYG drag-and-drop report builder lets agencies ship branded client reports without designers or custom templates.
- Site auditor checks 17+ technical error types on desktop and mobile and surfaces them in plain-English fix instructions.
Where it falls short
- Reviewers report that the platform feels neglected since the 2017 TapClicks acquisition, with slow feature releases and slow page loads.
- The site audit tool and the content-to-WordPress publishing tool are repeatedly called weak or broken in recent G2 and Capterra reviews.
- Data depth is shallower than Semrush or Ahrefs, so agencies still need a primary SEO tool alongside Raven.
- The UI is described as outdated and harder to navigate than newer tools like Search Atlas or SE Ranking.
Pricing, tier by tier
Tier 1
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
Raven Tools
Small Biz
$49/mo
- 2 domains or campaigns
- 2 users
- 1,500 position checks
- Automated client reports
Tier 2
Lumar
—
—
Raven Tools
Start
$109/mo
- 20 domains or campaigns
- 4 users
- 15,000 position checks
- Rank tracking across Google, Yahoo, Bing, Yandex, Baidu
Tier 3
Lumar
—
—
Raven Tools
Grow
$199/mo
- 80 domains or campaigns
- 8 users
- 20,000 position checks
- Competitor research tools
Tier 4
Lumar
—
—
Raven Tools
Thrive
$299/mo
- 160 domains or campaigns
- 20 users
- 25,000 position checks
- Full WYSIWYG report builder
Tier 5
Lumar
—
—
Raven Tools
Lead
$479/mo
- 320 domains or campaigns
- 40 users
- 30,000 position checks
- Priority support
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 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
Only on Raven Tools
- Marketing Reports. Drag-and-drop report builder with 30+ data modules covering SEO, PPC, social, and analytics.
- Site Auditor. Crawls sites and flags 17+ technical SEO error categories on desktop and mobile.
- Rank Tracker. Daily, weekly, or monthly position tracking across Google, Bing, Yahoo, Yandex, and Baidu.
- Backlink Explorer. Majestic-powered backlink research with up to 50,000 backlinks per URL.
- Research Central. Combined keyword and competitor research powered by Moz, Majestic, IBM Watson, and Google data.
- Link Manager. Tracks link building outreach status across contacts, campaigns, and deliverables.
When each one wins
When Lumar wins
- 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; Raven Tools doesn't yet.
- Handles very large sites (millions of URLs) where desktop crawlers like Screaming Frog hit resource limits
When Raven Tools wins
- Budget is the constraint. Raven Tools starts at $49/mo vs Lumar's $∞/mo, so on a per-seat basis it's the cheaper way in.
- Single sign-on pulls client Google Analytics, Search Console, and Google Ads into one dashboard, which agencies repeatedly call out as the main reason they stay.
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 Lumar 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 Lumar over Raven Tools
- Better-funded incumbent. Lumar has raised $37.6M, giving it more runway and shipping velocity than Raven Tools (Acquired by TapClicks (2017)).
- SOC 2 Type 2. Lumar carries SOC 2 Type 2; Raven Tools does not yet, which can hold up procurement.
- Higher G2 rating. Lumar averages 4.6/5 on G2 across 101 reviews; Raven Tools averages 4.2.
- Faster product velocity. Lumar has shipped 5 public launches in the last year vs Raven Tools's 0.
- 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.
Reasons to pick Raven Tools over Lumar
- Lower entry price. Raven Tools publishes a clear entry tier at $49/mo; Lumar gates pricing.
- More plan flexibility. Raven Tools offers 5 pricing tiers vs Lumar's 1, so there's a better chance one fits your team size.
- More verified reviews. Raven Tools has 154 G2 reviews vs Lumar's 101, so the average rating carries more weight.
- What users praise most. Single sign-on pulls client Google Analytics, Search Console, and Google Ads into one dashboard, which agencies repeatedly call out as the main reason they stay.
Switching from one to the other
From Lumar to Raven Tools
Export your saved queries and prompt panels from Lumar (most tools support CSV export). Most Raven Tools setups can import the same query list in a single CSV upload. Expect 1-2 days of parallel running so you can validate Raven Tools's data againstLumar's; one to two weeks of full reconciliation before you cancel Lumar. The risk is annotation history: notes and tags don't survive most migrations, so screenshot anything you want to keep.
From Raven Tools to Lumar
Same flow in reverse. Export from Raven Tools, import to Lumar. 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
| Lumar | Raven Tools | |
|---|---|---|
| Starts at (USD/mo) | Custom | $49/mo |
| Founded | 2010 | 2007 |
| Headquarters | London, UK | Nashville, TN |
| Funding raised | $37.6M | Acquired by TapClicks (2017) |
| AI platforms tracked | — | — |
| G2 rating | 4.6 / 5 (101 reviews) | 4.2 / 5 (154 reviews) |
| Named customers | 7 | 5 |
| 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.
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
Raven Tools — what users praise
- Single sign-on pulls client Google Analytics, Search Console, and Google Ads into one dashboard, which agencies repeatedly call out as the main reason they stay.
- Moz and Majestic backlink data are bundled into every plan, so agencies do not need separate $99+/mo Moz or Majestic subscriptions.
- WYSIWYG drag-and-drop report builder lets agencies ship branded client reports without designers or custom templates.
- Site auditor checks 17+ technical error types on desktop and mobile and surfaces them in plain-English fix instructions.
- Rank tracking covers Google, Bing, Yahoo, Yandex, and Baidu in one place, useful for agencies with international clients.
Raven Tools — what users complain about
- Reviewers report that the platform feels neglected since the 2017 TapClicks acquisition, with slow feature releases and slow page loads.
- The site audit tool and the content-to-WordPress publishing tool are repeatedly called weak or broken in recent G2 and Capterra reviews.
- Data depth is shallower than Semrush or Ahrefs, so agencies still need a primary SEO tool alongside Raven.
- The UI is described as outdated and harder to navigate than newer tools like Search Atlas or SE Ranking.
- Capterra reviewers cite poor customer support response times and billing issues that persist after cancellation.
A third option
Both Lumar and Raven Toolsare 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, Lumar or Raven Tools?
Honestly: neither one fully solves the problem. Lumar and Raven Tools 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 Lumar 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 Lumar and Raven Tools cost?
Lumar starts at Custom. Raven Tools starts at $49/mo. 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 Lumar and Raven Tools actually improve your AI visibility, or just measure it?
Both Lumar and Raven Tools 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 Lumar and Raven Tools?
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.