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

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

A new SEO keyword research tool promising cheaper, pay-per-use pricing than incumbents like Ahrefs and SEMrush attracted interest from marketers and founders frustrated with high subscription costs. Commenters probed its data sources, feature set, and limitations — noting it currently focuses on keyword research using Google Ads–derived volumes and a third‑party data provider, with planned additions like backlink analysis, exports, tagging, and better caching. Alongside UI feedback and technical questions, some raised broader concerns about SEO tools contributing to spammy, LLM‑generated content and web bloat, while others argued that as long as businesses believe they need SEO, lower-cost options will remain valuable.

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.