Pick
Lumar
Pick Lumar if you trust traction signals — they list 7 customers, Wordtune lists 1; and SOC 2 Type 2 matters for your security review.
Head-to-head review · Updated June 2026
Lumar vs Wordtune: which one wins in 2026?
Lumar and Wordtune 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, Wordtune has raised $636M across 7 rounds (AI21 Labs, Wordtune parent); Wordtune is the more-funded incumbent; Lumar is the leaner challenger.
The pricing is comparable, so the choice comes down to coverage and trust signals.
The verdict
Pick
Wordtune
Pick Wordtune if you want the better-funded company ($636M across 7 rounds (AI21 Labs, Wordtune parent)).
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 Wordtune
Wordtune has raised $636M across 7 rounds (AI21 Labs, Wordtune parent) (Series D, $300M, May 2025). Founded by Yoav Shoham, Ori Goshen, Amnon Shashua, based in Tel Aviv, Israel. On their site they list 1 named customers including Several million users (per AI21 Labs). Pricing starts at $0/mo.
AI writing companion that rewrites and refines your text.
What people praise
- G2 rating of 4.6 across 196 reviews places Wordtune among the top-rated AI writing assistants alongside Grammarly.
- Chrome extension works inside Gmail, LinkedIn, Web Outlook, Google Docs and most browser writing surfaces.
- Annual pricing at $4.89 to $6.99/mo is half the cost of Grammarly Premium and a fraction of Jasper or Copy.ai.
- Rewrite engine excels at tone shifts (formal versus casual) and rephrasing, which is its core differentiator.
Where it falls short
- Daily rewrite caps on Free (10/day) and Advanced (30/day) force frequent upgrades for any heavy user.
- G2 reviewers note suggestions can feel repetitive or generic on longer paragraphs, weaker than Claude or ChatGPT directly.
- Outlook integration is web-only, not the Outlook desktop app, which excludes most enterprise users.
- Wordtune is a writing assistant, not a content marketing platform: no SEO, no long-form workflow, no team collaboration.
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
Wordtune
Basic
$0/mo
- 10 rewrites and AI suggestions per day
- 3 AI summarizations per month
- Unlimited spelling corrections
- Unlimited grammar checks
Tier 2
Lumar
—
—
Wordtune
Advanced
$6.99/mo
- 30 rewrites and AI suggestions per day
- 15 AI summarizations per month
- Unlimited AI recommendations
- Unlimited spelling and grammar checks
Tier 3
Lumar
—
—
Wordtune
Unlimited
$9.99/mo
- Unlimited rewrites and AI suggestions
- Unlimited AI summarizations
- Unlimited spelling and grammar checks
- Vocabulary enhancements
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 Wordtune
- Rewrite. Generates alternative phrasings for any selected sentence with tone control (casual, formal, shorter, longer).
- AI Summarization. Summarizes long articles, YouTube videos, and PDFs into key points.
- Tone Switching. Adjusts text between formal and casual tones in one click, useful for cross-context writing.
- Grammar and Spelling. Real-time grammar and spelling correction across all supported surfaces.
- Smart Translation. Translates from 10 languages into English while improving fluency and clarity.
- Chrome Extension. Runs across Gmail, LinkedIn, Web Outlook, Google Docs, and any browser writing surface.
When each one wins
When Lumar wins
- You're enterprise and need to call a reference. Lumar lists 7 named customers; Wordtune lists 1.
- Procurement requires SOC 2 Type 2. Lumar has it; Wordtune doesn't yet.
- Handles very large sites (millions of URLs) where desktop crawlers like Screaming Frog hit resource limits
When Wordtune wins
- Budget is the constraint. Wordtune starts at $0/mo vs Lumar's $∞/mo, so on a per-seat basis it's the cheaper way in.
- You want the better-funded incumbent. Wordtune has raised $636M across 7 rounds (AI21 Labs, Wordtune parent), giving it more runway and shipping velocity.
- G2 rating of 4.6 across 196 reviews places Wordtune among the top-rated AI writing assistants alongside Grammarly.
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 Wordtune
- More named customers. Lumar lists 7 customers vs Wordtune's 1, including Adobe, Deloitte, Motley Fool.
- SOC 2 Type 2. Lumar carries SOC 2 Type 2; Wordtune does not yet, which can hold up procurement.
- More mature platform. Lumar (founded 2010) has had more time to harden the product than Wordtune (2018).
- 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 Wordtune over Lumar
- Lower entry price. Wordtune publishes a clear entry tier at $0/mo; Lumar gates pricing.
- More plan flexibility. Wordtune offers 3 pricing tiers vs Lumar's 1, so there's a better chance one fits your team size.
- Better-funded incumbent. Wordtune has raised $636M across 7 rounds (AI21 Labs, Wordtune parent), giving it more runway and shipping velocity than Lumar ($37.6M).
- More verified reviews. Wordtune has 196 G2 reviews vs Lumar's 101, so the average rating carries more weight.
- Built for the LLM era. Wordtune was founded in 2018, built around AI search from day one; Lumar dates back to 2010 and is retrofitting.
- What users praise most. G2 rating of 4.6 across 196 reviews places Wordtune among the top-rated AI writing assistants alongside Grammarly.
Switching from one to the other
From Lumar to Wordtune
Export your saved queries and prompt panels from Lumar (most tools support CSV export). Most Wordtune setups can import the same query list in a single CSV upload. Expect 1-2 days of parallel running so you can validate Wordtune'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 Wordtune to Lumar
Same flow in reverse. Export from Wordtune, 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 | Wordtune | |
|---|---|---|
| Starts at (USD/mo) | Custom | $0/mo |
| Founded | 2010 | 2018 |
| Headquarters | London, UK | Tel Aviv, Israel |
| Funding raised | $37.6M | $636M across 7 rounds (AI21 Labs, Wordtune parent) |
| AI platforms tracked | — | — |
| G2 rating | 4.6 / 5 (101 reviews) | 4.6 / 5 (196 reviews) |
| Named customers | 7 | 1 |
| 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
Wordtune — what users praise
- G2 rating of 4.6 across 196 reviews places Wordtune among the top-rated AI writing assistants alongside Grammarly.
- Chrome extension works inside Gmail, LinkedIn, Web Outlook, Google Docs and most browser writing surfaces.
- Annual pricing at $4.89 to $6.99/mo is half the cost of Grammarly Premium and a fraction of Jasper or Copy.ai.
- Rewrite engine excels at tone shifts (formal versus casual) and rephrasing, which is its core differentiator.
- Backed by AI21 Labs ($636M raised), so platform stability and model R&D are not concerns versus indie writing tools.
Wordtune — what users complain about
- Daily rewrite caps on Free (10/day) and Advanced (30/day) force frequent upgrades for any heavy user.
- G2 reviewers note suggestions can feel repetitive or generic on longer paragraphs, weaker than Claude or ChatGPT directly.
- Outlook integration is web-only, not the Outlook desktop app, which excludes most enterprise users.
- Wordtune is a writing assistant, not a content marketing platform: no SEO, no long-form workflow, no team collaboration.
- Microsoft Word integration is a separate AppSource plugin, not auto-installed with the main subscription.
A third option
Both Lumar and Wordtuneare 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 Wordtune?
Honestly: neither one fully solves the problem. Lumar and Wordtune 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 Wordtune cost?
Lumar starts at Custom. Wordtune starts at $0/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 Wordtune actually improve your AI visibility, or just measure it?
Both Lumar and Wordtune 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 Wordtune?
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.