Show HN: I’ve made a cheaper SEO research tool

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Product and Value Proposition

  • New SEO keyword research tool positioned as a cheaper, pay-per-use alternative to established suites.
  • Target users: makers, small businesses, and people who only do keyword research occasionally.
  • Tool focuses mainly on keyword research now; aims to become a “go-to” all-in-one SEO solution later.

Data Sources and Coverage

  • Uses a third‑party SEO data provider (DataForSEO) for keyword, volume, CPC, and other metrics.
  • Search volume and CPC reportedly come from Google Ads–related tools.
  • Claims large keyword coverage, including Brazil, Portugal, France, and Arabic (not for France).

Pricing and Billing Model

  • Pay-per-request model; provider charges roughly $0.01–$0.03 per query.
  • Users are billed for each data request, including pagination and new filters; this caused confusion and concern about “paying per page view.”
  • Some feel keyword tracking pricing is misaligned with sites that rank for many keywords.
  • Free “trial balance” is given after signup; no time-limited full trial.

Features, Limitations, and Roadmap

  • Currently offers keyword pages, keyword details, and domain keyword data.
  • Missing/limited now: API, tagging, advanced tracking, on-page audits, backlinks, app store data, robust caching.
  • Roadmap includes: on-page + backlink data, better filters (questions, long-tail), exports, tagging, magic-link/email signup, app/play store coverage, richer caching.

Comparisons to Other SEO Tools

  • Users compare it to Ahrefs, SEMrush, Ubersuggest, Google Keyword Planner, and Nightwatch.
  • For pure keyword research it’s described as close to Ahrefs, but lacks Ahrefs’ site explorer and audits.
  • Some argue most tools sit atop the same data providers, so differentiation is mainly UX and pricing.
  • Others say established tools’ value lies in proprietary clickstream/backlink data and deeper analysis, not just keyword lists.

UX, Bugs, and Design Feedback

  • Several UI bugs reported: FAQ not expanding, question mark tooltip content wrong/missing, www subdomain not resolving, caching issues leading to extra charges.
  • Developer quickly added CSV export and column sorting after feedback and improved session caching.
  • Landing page seen as clean but derivative of Tailwind UI templates; logo noted as similar to other brands.

Meta Discussion about SEO and Ethics

  • Some criticize SEO tools as contributing to spammy, low-quality web content and heavy bot traffic.
  • Others question the importance of keyword tools in an era of LLM-generated content and argue for focusing on depth and quality.
  • Concerns raised about clickstream-based data (via browser plugins, VPNs, etc.) and its demographic biases.