Majestic vs Ahrefs: Feature, Pricing, and Backlink Data Comparison 2025
Choosing between Majestic and Ahrefs for your SEO toolkit involves a careful data-focused review of their capabilities. This comparison serves US SEO professionals by providing an in-depth look, covering everything from pricing levels to backlink checker effectiveness. This way, you can resolve the Majestic vs Ahrefs discussion with transparent evidence and distinctive platform features.
Majestic vs Ahrefs: Core Differences Overview
When evaluating Majestic vs Ahrefs, the first step is to recognize their primary differences. Both tools are widely used for checking backlinks, but within the US market, Ahrefs provides a broader SEO solution, including site audits, keyword monitoring, and topic research capabilities. Majestic, by contrast, targets specialized and detailed link intelligence. Regarding Ahrefs pricing and Majestic pricing, Ahrefs features a higher starting cost because of its integrated toolset, while Majestic’s plans are designed for users seeking cost-effective, focused link analysis.
Each platform comes with a strong array of features, but their design and workflow attract different users. Ahrefs offers a feature-rich, visually intuitive experience—suiting agencies that need comprehensive reporting and quick toggling between tools. Majestic attracts technical pros who prioritize deep link investigations, particularly for metrics like citation and trust.
Support and educational opportunities also stand out. Agencies in the US praise Ahrefs for its in-software recommendations and training resources, making it approachable for new users. Majestic’s system requires a higher skill level but offers helpful support during complex analysis. For firms needing rapid onboarding or straightforward dashboards, Ahrefs appeals most; for users needing granular backlink audit tools and deep historical review, Majestic remains a favorite among experts.
Tool Focus: All-in-One SEO Suite vs Link Intelligence Platform
The essential distinction in the Majestic vs Ahrefs debate centers on their core aims. Ahrefs is identified as a thorough all-in-one SEO suite, merging link analysis, site reviews, keyword research, position monitoring, content gap analysis, and other functions. US agencies typically favor Ahrefs as a versatile, single solution for diverse search campaigns.
Majestic, in contrast, is dedicated to link intelligence. Its layouts, dashboards, and reports focus on deep link discovery, Trust Flow, Citation Flow, and long-term backlink pattern tracking. When backlink analysis is the primary objective—especially for link-building services or technical audits—Majestic offers detailed, actionable results.
If your agency requires tools spanning all areas of SEO, Ahrefs offers an integrated environment. If your main priority is heavy link mapping or advanced competitor link intelligence, Majestic’s tailored reporting supports these activities with efficiency and depth.
Database Size: Ahrefs Live Index vs Majestic Historic Index
Ahrefs and Majestic both support their platforms with vast datasets, but they emphasize distinct strengths. Majestic’s Historic Index reports more than 20.5 trillion URLs dating back to 2006, making it valuable for long-term backlink analysis and investigations. Ahrefs focuses on a Live Index, with updates every 15 to 30 minutes, offering highly up-to-date data for monitoring new link-building actions or emerging patterns.
For teams examining changes over time or running in-depth audits, the sheer scale and historical range of Majestic’s records can be critical. Meanwhile, for agencies driving campaigns in the present or needing to track fast-changing activity, the frequency of Ahrefs’ updates serves US businesses seeking up-to-date validation and detection of current trends.
User Interface and Learning Curve
For agencies in the US training new team members, interface usability often determines platform selection. Ahrefs is recognized for pairing advanced reporting with straightforward navigation, tooltips, and accessible guides. Majestic is praised for technical accuracy but requires a firmer grasp of its proprietary scoring systems and offers a more specialized user experience. The best fit will depend on your team’s expertise and training infrastructure.
Backlink Analysis: Real Results from 100K Domains
Testing Majestic and Ahrefs with a broad sample of US domains demonstrates the impact of their backlink analysis approaches. Both platforms identify millions of backlinks, but with contrasting collection and reporting processes. In a 100K domain sample, Ahrefs delivered more current backlinks, while Majestic provided greater historical coverage, sometimes reporting more URLs by tracking every slight variation it locates.
Majestic’s expansive approach is helpful for clients needing exhaustive backlink inventories, including legal or compliance reporting. Ahrefs excels in presenting quickly usable results for ongoing US SEO projects, with data that spotlights high-priority risks or opportunities—never inflating numbers through duplicate detection.
Data comparisons across the same set of US sites frequently show Majestic reporting over 17 million links for a major domain, while Ahrefs might show 8 million. This isn’t a flaw but a result of differing methods between the two tools.
For everyday SEO operations, Majestic is chosen for its broader link context and long-term validation, whereas Ahrefs is favored for accurate, timely results—especially for agencies building or overseeing active backlink strategies with integration into routine workflows.
Backlink Count Accuracy: Ahrefs vs Majestic
Ahrefs and Majestic apply different logic to backlink reporting. Ahrefs eliminates duplicates related to URL parameters or tracking codes, providing a precise count. Majestic counts each variation separately, resulting in higher—but potentially less actionable—totals, especially on US sites with extensive tag usage.
Majestic’s exhaustive detail may overwhelm users with inflated numbers, while Ahrefs delivers a cleaner dataset for building clear, actionable link-building campaigns. The difference in accuracy is pronounced on high-traffic US domains marked by numerous campaign parameters.
Wins By IP Address (Majestic Fresh vs. Ahrefs Recent)
• Ahrefs reports a higher number of unique referring IP addresses for most US sites tested, offering broader daily awareness of live links.
• Majestic’s Fresh index continues to expose niche links, particularly those for older domains where earlier campaigns remain valuable.
Wins By Subnets (Majestic Fresh vs. Ahrefs Recent)
• Ahrefs consistently returns more referring subnets, offering stronger signals for identifying potential spam or private blog network risk.
• This capability enables US agencies to swiftly evaluate the diversity of a site’s link profile for client protection and reporting.
Total Wins – Majestic Fresh vs Ahrefs Recent
• Across US-focused projects, Ahrefs leads in collecting fresh data on both IPs and subnets.
• Majestic continues to offer strengths in deep history, though duplicate counting requires careful review.
Referring Domains: Unique vs Duplicate Links
The overall strength of a backlink profile is determined by unique referring domains rather than just raw link volume. Ahrefs highlights unique domain counts, making it simple to assess the number of separate sources linking to a client. Majestic also reports referring domains, though large backlink counts may require extra filtering to determine uniqueness clearly.
Comparing Referring Domain Reports
• Ahrefs’ analytics offer a clear advantage for competitor audits, especially when US organic rankings are affected by domain diversity.
• Majestic provides effective reporting but requires more effort to surface true domain variety without excess duplication.
Trust Flow vs Domain Rating: Which Metric is More Reliable?
In assessing site authority, Majestic’s Trust Flow emphasizes the quality of inbound links, while Citation Flow provides an assessment based on link quantity. Ahrefs’ Domain Rating (DR) assigns authority based on both strength and network distribution of backlinks. Trust Flow is regarded as more precise for spam detection, while DR has gained traction among US agencies for simple longitudinal tracking and client reporting.
Majestic’s Citation Flow may raise scores for domains with volume, but DR considers a broader and more holistic view of the global link graph. Combining these metrics benefits nuanced reporting, but DR remains the easier single benchmark across multiple clients or rapid campaign summaries.
Live vs Historic Index: What Matters More?
The comparison here is one of present status versus historical continuity. Ahrefs’ live index provides the most up-to-date data, particularly favored by US link builders overseeing current campaigns. Majestic’s historical index, covering data from nearly 20 years, remains especially valuable for reconstructing link histories or analyzing the evolution of a brand’s online presence.
For day-to-day campaign tracking and responsive action, Ahrefs leads. For deep retrospective research or evaluation of long-standing assets, Majestic’s depth is unmatched.
Wins By IP Address (Majestic Historical vs. Ahrefs Historical)
• Majestic’s historical data is superior for measuring IP diversity, especially for US sites active before 2015.
• Ahrefs’ historical reach continues to grow but is best seen in new US link profiles and tracking recent changes.
Wins By Subnets (Majestic Historical vs. Ahrefs Historical)
• Majestic captures more subnets on older US domains, assisting thorough audits across extensive link histories.
• Ahrefs provides both historical and up-to-date subnet coverage, supporting modern link mapping for US marketers.
Keyword Research Capabilities
Building effective US SEO strategies requires powerful keyword research tools, and Ahrefs clearly excels in this aspect. Ahrefs pulls from billions of keywords, providing granular details such as search volume, competition level, click-through likelihood, and worldwide statistics. Majestic’s keyword generator, meanwhile, derives suggestions from its backlink data—occasionally enhanced by AI—making it suitable when anchor text and link-driven keyword strategy are priorities, but less robust for broad content planning.
US agencies routinely find Ahrefs delivers stronger performance for identifying topics, understanding searcher needs, and structuring content clusters that align with real-time trends. By comparing workflow outcomes, Ahrefs sets the benchmark for full-spectrum keyword and topic discovery, with Majestic functioning mainly as a secondary tool for link-centric keyword extraction and anchor analysis.
Ahrefs is the preferred solution for pinpointing content gaps among US competitors, thanks to filters for ranking challenge, SERP features, and adapting to Google’s latest updates. Majestic, while strong for exploring linking context, often overlooks the high-impact queries critical for new client acquisition.
The ability to monitor, categorize, and extract comprehensive keyword datasets from Ahrefs gives US agencies an operational advantage, especially for exploring new territories or verticals. Majestic retains a specialized role for teams in affiliate marketing or outbound link strategy who require anchor-focused keyword overlap insights.
The consensus among US search professionals is that Ahrefs is the required platform for content-driven campaigns; Majestic offers a supporting toolset for anchor-focused research and niche audits.
Keyword Explorer: Ahrefs vs Majestic Generator
Ahrefs’ keyword interface supplies millions of seed ideas for each search, with metrics such as keyword difficulty, main topic grouping, and click projections across Google, YouTube, and Bing. It includes word counts, phrase matches, question variations, and clearly notes when results have been updated.
Majestic’s tool prioritizes keywords found in linking anchors and uses AI to expand its lists. It can reveal anchor text trends, but users frequently spend more time filtering out unrelated terms since it lacks intent scoring or comprehensive search context. For scalable, high-value keyword research, Ahrefs remains the standard.
Search Intent and Volume Metrics
Ahrefs organizes keywords by user search intent, marking whether the query is informational, navigational, transactional, or commercial, which enables US teams to match content with user needs across every buying phase. It also provides SERP click projections, tracking no-click and blended result frequencies seen in US Google usage.
Majestic provides keyword frequency and basic difficulty but does not label search intent, so campaign targeting becomes less straightforward. For high-stakes US topics, such as finance, law, or healthcare, Ahrefs’ data precision in intent and prioritization is especially valuable.
SERP Features and Global Coverage
• Tracks featured snippets for US and global Google queries
• Identifies AI Overviews and knowledge panels triggered by major US topics
• Documents local result packs—critical for US agencies with multiple locations
• Recognizes image and video carousels, highlighting shifts in visual content demand
• Spots “People Also Ask” boxes, adding fresh topic ideas for US content teams
• Provides coverage across more than 200 countries, supporting US-to-global campaign data
• Majestic focuses primarily on link-related keyword insights, largely omitting SERP feature tracking
Use Cases for Content Planning
US search strategists rely on Ahrefs to produce comprehensive content gap analyses, which are then used to schedule blog posts, landing pages, or resource centers that boost results in untapped areas.
Majestic contributes to audits targeting dominant anchor strategies within a specific niche, verifying the trust level of legal, financial, or highly regulated US firms. Ahrefs, however, is recognized for quickly surfacing intent-rich content clusters and topics with established ranking value.
Site Explorer and Reporting Tools
Both platforms feature powerful site explorer modules, but their workflow advantages differ for US agencies. Ahrefs’ Site Explorer enables rapid, in-depth site audits: including overviews, backlink profiles, organic search data, and paid keyword information. US marketers value the ability to navigate traffic and link graphs quickly, employ filters mid-process, and access project-specific details effortlessly.
Majestic’s reporting is data-driven, spotlighting site authority and page-level backlinks in a denser, classic format. While this suits agencies used to raw numerical reports, US clients expecting interactive visuals and straightforward dashboard layouts prefer Ahrefs.
When managing large US portfolios, flexibility in filtering, comparing, and exporting is critical. Ahrefs’ capability to save views, generate easily shared reports, and customize dashboards streamlines both agency management and client updates. Majestic is primarily adopted for single-use, detailed link audits or by boutique consultancies focused strictly on backlink evaluation.
Navigation and Filtering Options
Ahrefs empowers users to quickly access backlink, keyword, and traffic data via real-time and custom filters for link type, authority, anchor text, and region. These features are especially valuable for US teams managing national brands or franchises with complex needs.
Majestic is structured for link experts, with direct menus for Trust/Citation Flow scores, anchor summaries, and “Topical Trust” maps. However, its filtering is less adaptable for US agencies with several parallel SEO projects and diverse deliverables.
Anchor Text and Link Context Analysis
• Ahrefs: Presents anchor terms organized by site authority and link setting for every US client profile.
• Majestic: Produces anchor word visualizations, revealing risk from over-optimized terms.
• Ahrefs: Interactive tables show linking domains for each anchor, supporting audits for US finance and legal clients.
• Majestic: Categorizes anchors by sector through Topical Trust Flow, making industry- or niche- analysis straightforward for US link-building.
• Ahrefs: Highlights lost or newly acquired anchor terms, streamlining recurring client reporting.
• Majestic: Features “Clean anchor text,” which removes punctuation for clear summaries.
• Ahrefs: Plots historical changes by anchor, valuable for cleaning up old links or tracking online reputation shifts in the US.
Exporting Data: Full vs Sampled Reports
Ahrefs provides complete exporting capabilities without limits on record volume, which is especially beneficial for agencies handling large projects in the US. Majestic imposes sample or row limits for most users unless upgraded, which can affect reporting and comparison for multiple clients.
Visualization and Graphs: Ahrefs vs Majestic
Ahrefs offers dynamic, visually engaging charts for US referring domains and search performance, allowing data to be explored flexibly by timeline. Majestic’s visuals focus on data points like crawl rates, sticking closer to traditional layouts. For firms presenting US marketing growth, Ahrefs is the preferred choice for visually compelling reporting.
Technical SEO and Site Audits
Technical SEO is an essential part of US agency programs. Here, Ahrefs stands as the sole comprehensive choice for checking site health, discovering issues, and tracking technical corrections. Majestic does not feature technical audit or error discovery tools, focusing on backlink data and missing broader site diagnostics for US workflows.
Ahrefs audits sites for over 170 types of technical and content problems, with integrations for Web Vitals, index depth changes, and JavaScript support—all critical to brands with compliance or performance requirements. Issues are ranked, simplifying team prioritization and development assignments.
US teams value Ahrefs for its reliable, organized audit exports, immediate recommendations, and seamless collaboration with web development teams. Majestic’s technical ability comes only through indirect link signals, which does not adequately cover modern SEO or complicated US web properties.
Site Audit Availability: Ahrefs Only
• Ahrefs: Delivers comprehensive technical site audits on every plan
• Majestic: No technical site audit or health check features available
• Ahrefs: Scans up to 170,000 URLs per minute for US campaigns
• Core Web Vitals scoring combined with audit insights for site speed and structure
• US agencies rely on Ahrefs to monitor architectures, error lists, and search index coverage
• Real-time error notifications provided in Ahrefs, improving team response
• Clear site health scores contextualized by importance for executive summaries
• Errors categorized by urgency for simple workflow assignment
• Majestic excludes technical audit coverage entirely, requiring other solutions
Crawl Depth and Issue Detection
Ahrefs separates audit findings by crawl level, constructing actionable lists for urgent problems. Reports detect problems such as broken links, repeated content, canonical mismatches, redirect loops, and page performance—common issues for US ecommerce or large-scale companies.
This comprehensive view speeds up troubleshooting and improvement for complex businesses. Constant monitoring by Ahrefs allows tracking progress and correlating solutions with recovery in analytics reports.
Integration with Looker Studio and Reporting Tools
Ahrefs offers integration with Looker Studio, enabling custom dashboards built on live site audit, speed, and indexing data. Majestic lacks reporting integration features, focusing on standalone link reporting rather than analytics stack connectivity for US agencies.
Ahrefs’ audit outputs deliver value in executive presentations, agency-client updates, and stakeholder meetings across the US market.
Pricing and Value for Money
Assessing Majestic pricing against Ahrefs pricing is key for US firms designing their SEO systems. Majestic’s entry plan is a budget-friendly $49.99/month, ideal for consultants emphasizing backlink analysis or small agencies with focused requirements. Ahrefs begins at $129/month, featuring all essential modules—technical audits, keyword research, and campaign monitoring—fueling its adoption among agencies with wider needs.
While both tools scale for enterprise-level users, higher price points correspond with divergent strategies: Ahrefs suits national brands or agencies managing numerous clients with multi-layered needs, whereas Majestic’s advanced levels are best for dedicated link analysts running consistent, bulk audits.
The return on investment difference is a matter of priority. If only backlink counts and trust scoring are required, especially for legacy research, Majestic is the more economical choice. Where complete SEO campaign management, monitoring, and integration are critical, Ahrefs commands a premium justified by exceptional usability.
US agencies should assess whether their focus is comprehensive site performance and content, or deep insight into links alone. For multi-client, national projects, the efficiency and reporting capabilities built into Ahrefs often balance the upfront price, especially with high volume or routine onboarding demands.
Plan Tiers and Monthly Costs
Majestic provides three plans: Lite at $49.99/month (for basic backlink analytics), Pro at $99.99/month (adds advanced tools and higher data caps), and API at $399.99/month for enterprise-level usage. Ahrefs’ pricing includes Lite ($129), Standard ($249), Advanced ($449), and Enterprise ($1,499) tiers, with increases corresponding to project capacity, history depth, tracking volume, and higher crawl allocations.
Agencies onboarding many new clients typically select upper-level Ahrefs plans for unrestricted exporting, multi-user access, and fast support turnarounds. Majestic’s value is strongest for specialty link analysts or boutique agencies running concise projects.
The Ahrefs keyword module and audit functions are found on every paid tier, capabilities not available on any Majestic plan.
US teams requiring consolidated reporting, account support, or custom dashboards should factor in these inclusions when selecting the best SEO investment.
Free Tools and Trial Options
• Majestic: Basic access plan restricts API and search capacity per device/IP
• Ahrefs: Webmaster Tools free for US domain owners, providing limited health and backlink overviews
• Majestic Lite: Low-cost approach for single-site or comparative analysis
• Ahrefs Starter: $29/month for light use; full operational needs require Lite at $129
• Majestic’s free level resets every 24 hours, which could limit productivity for agencies with several accounts
• Ahrefs Webmaster Tools grants a reduced set of checks and reporting for verified properties
• Neither platform grants unrestricted free use; Ahrefs offers broader features to users verifying their own domains
• US users are encouraged to evaluate the free levels on company-owned websites prior to scaling up for clients
Best Value for Link Builders vs Full SEO Teams
• Independent US link-building professionals: Majestic is priced and structured for link-only work
• Consultants offering broader audits and content analysis: Ahrefs gives significantly more scope per dollar
• Franchises or regional firms: Ahrefs’ quotas are a match for the needs of multi-property US businesses
• Small brands with only a primary website: Majestic Lite delivers effective spot-checking and PR surveillance
• Enterprise agencies: Ahrefs delivers additional reporting, flexible integrations, and bulk purchasing options
• High-frequency users and researchers: Majestic offers unique API benefits and extensive archives
• Corporate SEO teams: Ahrefs centralizes all research and allows integration with analytics and marketing platforms
• Link-building outreach teams: Majestic is optimal for rapid, keyword-targeted campaigns on a modest budget
• Larger entities requiring routine audits and competitor study: Ahrefs scales with increased reporting and project features
Majestic vs Ahrefs: Side-by-Side Comparison Table
| Feature | Ahrefs | Majestic |
| Market Share (US) | 23.08% | 0.2% |
| Primary Focus | All-in-one SEO suite: links, keywords, audits, content | Dedicated link intelligence: Historic, Trust/Citation Flow |
| Database Size | 400B+ pages, 14T live backlinks | 20.5T unique URLs since 2006 |
| Data Updates | Every 15–30 minutes (Live Index for US campaigns) | Fresh (90 days) and Historic (lifetime) Indexes |
| Site Audit Capability | Full audit tool on all plans | None; link-only focus |
| Keyword Research Depth | 17B+ keywords, intent, SERP insight for US | AI-based, anchor-driven; less US focus |
| Starting Price | $129/month (Lite) | $49.99/month (Lite) |
| Data Export Limits | Full export on all paid plans | 5,000 rows (Lite), 50,000 (API); sampled |
| Authority Metrics | Domain Rating (DR) | Trust Flow (TF), Citation Flow (CF) |
| Reporting/Integration | Looker Studio, custom dashboard sync | None |
| Best For | US agencies, all-in-one SEO teams, large content play | Solo link builders, forensic audits, spam detection |
| Free Tier/Entry | Webmaster Tools (limited) | Free sample, resets daily |
| User Interface | Modern, interactive, fast onboarding | Data-centric, legacy navigation |
| Content Planning | Content gap, topic clustering, competitor analysis | Anchor text patterns, topical trust review |
| US Enterprise Support | Enterprise tier, bulk clients, automation | API plan, historic research |
| Platform Market Fit | Full-stack US marketing teams/agencies | Specialist link firms, academic SEO research |
This chart assists US marketers in evaluating Majestic vs Ahrefs features and costs. Identify the most relevant criteria for your business to select suitable tools promptly.
Key Takeaways
• Ahrefs commands a 23% US market share and is preferred by agencies seeking a comprehensive SEO platform
• Majestic offers attractive pricing for individuals or firms concentrating on link acquisition and analysis
• Ahrefs comes at a higher price but packages audits, keyword discovery, and content workflow tools
• Majestic’s Historic Index is particularly valuable for extensive link history needs and detailed forensic reviews
• Ahrefs’ real-time data is essential for tracking fast campaigns in competitive US niches
• For ongoing site review and error monitoring, Ahrefs is required, while Majestic doesn’t offer similar features
• Ahrefs stands out in keyword tracking and planning, covering 200+ countries with integrated intent metrics
• Majestic’s keyword engine is tailored toward link-building and anchor keyword research
• Ahrefs provides unlimited exporting on paid plans, whereas Majestic limits rows unless the API plan is selected
• Majestic’s Trust Flow and Ahrefs’ Domain Rating are widely referenced by US SEO professionals for domain authority checks
• Majestic’s lower price is best for specialist agencies but can limit scalability across US-focused, full-service SEO teams
• Ahrefs integrates directly with reporting tools like Looker Studio, supporting transparent US client communications
• Majestic’s topical trust and citation scores are useful for vetting link relevance—helpful for legal or financial industries
• If your strategy is focused on links and controlling costs, Majestic meets your needs; for broad content, audit, and client reporting, Ahrefs offers stronger solutions
• Ahrefs is easier and faster to onboard new users within US agency teams
• Choosing Majestic vs Ahrefs depends on required data depth or breadth across your portfolio
• US marketing teams should align platform selections with pricing levels, retainer structures, and anticipated returns
• Using both platforms together provides the maximum degree of SEO transparency and accuracy in US campaigns
Frequently Asked Questions
Is Majestic superior to Ahrefs?
Ahrefs provides a more frequently updated and versatile toolkit, but Majestic’s backlink index remains among the most advanced. It is particularly strong at detecting spammy domains, surpassing most competitors for link quality evaluation.
Are Ahrefs and Majestic more dependable than SEMrush?
Ahrefs and Majestic generally deliver more thorough and current backlink information than SEMrush. Their databases track up to 50% more links, making their metrics—Ahrefs Domain Rating (DR) and Majestic Trust Flow (TF)—typically more dependable for evaluating link authority.
Should I pick Ahrefs?
If your workflow includes creating content, tracking search positions, conducting technical site reviews, and building links, Ahrefs is a strong choice. It offers an extensive set of SEO features for varied tasks.
What is Ahrefs and how does it operate?
Ahrefs is an integrated SEO platform that began as a backlink analysis tool and evolved to include keyword research, technical site audits, rank tracking, and more. It uses a massive, regularly updated database to ensure precise SEO data.
What defines Majestic SEO?
Majestic SEO specializes in link analysis and keyword generation, excelling at historical backlink data and offering proprietary metrics like Trust Flow and Citation Flow. Operating since 2004, it is considered a reputable authority in link intelligence.
What is rank tracking within Ahrefs?
Ahrefs features rank tracking, allowing users to follow keyword rankings, estimated traffic, and search volumes. Majestic is starting to add rank tracking, but Ahrefs has a more established system in this area.
Which tool is superior for in-depth SEO analysis, Ahrefs or Majestic?
Ahrefs is favored for deep SEO analysis since it covers backlinks, keyword research, site audits, and rank monitoring. Majestic’s main strength is in link data and intelligence.
How do the backlink indexes of Ahrefs and Majestic differ?
Ahrefs maintains a real-time index with over 14 trillion backlinks, updating constantly. Majestic offers a historic database with more than 20.5 trillion URLs, but often includes duplicate links due to parameter differences. Ahrefs tends to provide more precise link counts by eliminating duplicates.
What are the main differences in pricing between Ahrefs and Majestic?
Majestic starts at $49.99/month for its Lite plan, making it more affordable. Ahrefs starts at $129/month, but this includes a wider array of SEO functionalities in the cost.
Which tool excels at keyword research?
Ahrefs is far more effective for keyword research, with data on millions of keywords, including metrics like volume, difficulty, and intent. Majestic’s keyword tools are limited and predominantly focus on link-related terms.
Does Majestic include website audit capabilities like Ahrefs?
Majestic does not offer site audit functionality. In contrast, Ahrefs includes comprehensive auditing with over 100 checks for technical SEO issues, catering to users needing a full SEO platform.
Final Thoughts: Choosing Between Majestic vs Ahrefs
Deciding between Majestic and Ahrefs depends on your team’s SEO requirements and the reach of your projects. Ahrefs stands out for offering a wide-ranging SEO toolkit with advanced keyword research, technical health reviews, and current data—making it the preferred choice for US agencies and internal teams seeking an integrated platform. Majestic shines with thorough link intelligence, robust historical data, and pricing tailored for specialists with a dedicated focus on backlink analysis. Let’s discuss with FHSEOHUB and solve issues instatntly.
