Qwairy vs Rankscale (2026): €79 Feature Dump vs $20 Engine Coverage
Rankscale puts 17+ engines on every plan from $20. Qwairy puts 10+ names on a credit meter. Promptwatch is the third column.
If the reason you opened Qwairy was "how many assistants can I sample," Rankscale already won that argument at $20/mo. 17+ engines, no per-engine surcharge. Qwairy's 10+ list is shorter, mixed API/UI, and prepaid. Promptwatch is the third column when you wanted coverage plus a publish loop. The comparison is really about what you are buying: a sample of many engines, a sitemap of features, or a closed loop that turns visibility into published pages. Each of these three answers a different one of those questions, and the price tags reflect which question is being answered.
Google's AI features guidance still covers Overviews. It does not store ChatGPT or Perplexity answers on a prompt you typed. The reason this matters for the comparison is that neither Qwairy nor Rankscale can lean on Google for the cross-engine prompt log. The prompt log is the thing you are paying one of these three for, and Google's docs cover the Google side only.
$20 vs €79 vs $95. Rankscale wins coverage per dollar. Qwairy wins noun count on a sitemap. Promptwatch wins when sampling is over. The three numbers are not a ranked list of better-to-worse. They are three different jobs priced at three different points, and the right pick depends on which job you are actually hiring a tool to do.
Snapshot comparison
| Qwairy | Rankscale | Promptwatch | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Starting price | Free credits; €79/mo | $20/mo | Free Explore; $95/mo Essential |
| Engines | 10+ names, 3 API-only | 17+ on every plan | 10+ live UIs including Claude |
| Credits | 1 query = 1 credit/model; pause | Burn varies ~8x by engine | Prompt/response caps |
| Audits | Site readiness module | GEO readability audits (scores need 30-day averages) | Content gap on Essential; crawler errors on Professional |
| Content / CMS | 50 credits/brief | No publish loop | Content Agents |
| API / white-label | API from Growth €199 | $385/mo Growth | API v2 on paid; white-label on Enterprise/Custom only |
| Reviews | Unpublished here | 4.6/5 OMR Reviews | 4.7/5 G2 |
Reading the table row by row, the starting price row sets the frame: Rankscale is the cheapest entry, Qwairy sits in the middle in euros, and Promptwatch's paid entry is $95. The engines row is where the coverage claim lives. Rankscale's 17+ is on every plan, Qwairy's 10+ includes 3 API-only rows, and Promptwatch's 10+ are live UIs including Claude. The credits row is the one that determines whether the headline price holds up over a month. Qwairy charges one credit per model per query and then pauses. Rankscale burns credits at rates that vary about 8x by engine. Promptwatch uses prompt and response caps instead of a pause-at-zero wallet. The audits row shows where each product puts its diagnostic effort: Qwairy has a site readiness module, Rankscale has GEO readability audits that need 30-day averages to be stable, and Promptwatch puts content gap analysis on Essential and crawler errors on Professional. The content row is the one that separates the samplers from the loop tools. Qwairy gives 50 credits per brief. Rankscale has no publish loop. Promptwatch has Content Agents that actually publish. The API row governs who can white-label: Qwairy opens API at Growth €199, Rankscale at $385/mo Growth, and Promptwatch only on Enterprise/Custom for white-label. The reviews row is the last check: Qwairy's are unpublished here, Rankscale is 4.6/5 on OMR Reviews, and Promptwatch is 4.7/5 on G2.
Qwairy is not wider than Rankscale. Rankscale's 17+ on every plan is the coverage play. Qwairy's 10+ is a marketing list with API rows (3 API-only). The reason this needs saying twice is that the homepage noun count invites the wrong comparison. A buyer counting names on a homepage will conclude Qwairy covers more, when in fact three of those names are API-only rows that do not behave like the live UI checks the other two products offer.
Qwairy's case
MCP on €79. Content Studio on the sitemap. Looks like more product than a $20 tracker.
It is more nouns. It is not more coverage. Rankscale's long tail is the point of Rankscale. 1 query = 1 credit per model, then pause. Site readiness module. 50 credits per brief. API from Growth €199. Reviews unpublished here. The way to read Qwairy's value is that it bundles several surfaces into one cockpit, and the cockpit is genuinely useful if your team wants a single screen that shows site readiness, content briefs, and prompt checks together. What it does not do is cover more engines than Rankscale, and the credit model means the price you actually pay depends on how many models you query per prompt.
Pick Qwairy if you insist on a cockpit screenshot. That is a taste, not coverage. The honest framing is that Qwairy is the right pick when the buying decision is about having one consolidated workspace, not about maximizing the number of engines sampled per dollar. If the cockpit is what your team will actually use, the €79 is defensible. If the cockpit is a screenshot for a deck, Rankscale at $20 covers more ground for less.
Rankscale's case
Vienna GmbH. Widest engine list per dollar in our catalog. Site audits next to visibility. Founder-led onboarding. The combination is unusual because most cheap trackers cover few engines and most wide trackers cost more. Rankscale's pitch is that you get the long-tail engine sample and the audit on the same bill, and the bill starts at $20.
Audit scores bounce; docs say use 30-day averages. No PDF. No revenue attribution (docs say visibility leads results by 4 to 8 weeks). UI moves around. Credits still exist, just priced per engine instead of as a hard pause. Burn varies about 8x by engine. The docs do not describe Qwairy's "analyses pause at zero" wallet in the same words. Budget still moves. The practical takeaway from that list of caveats is that Rankscale is a sampling tool, not a reporting tool. The audit scores are noisy enough that a single snapshot is not trustworthy, and the lack of revenue attribution means you cannot close the loop from visibility to dollars inside the product. You can sample a lot of engines cheaply, and you should expect to export the results and reason about them somewhere else.
4.6/5 OMR Reviews. $385/mo Growth for API / white-label. No publish loop. Pick Rankscale to sample long-tail engines on a tiny bill. The Growth tier is where Rankscale stops being a cheap sampler and starts being an integration, and the price jump from $20 to $385 is the line between those two uses.
Promptwatch's case
You pay $95 instead of $20 for Essential and get Claude as a live UI, articles, and visitor analytics with conversions. Essential does not include crawler logs. Professional adds 25M logs at $245. You do not get 17 assistants or Qwairy's Fact Check beta. The trade is explicit: fewer engines sampled than Rankscale, no cockpit like Qwairy, but a closed loop from prompt to citation to visit to published page that neither of the other two offers.
Essential has 10+ live UIs including Claude, content-gap analysis, Content Agents, and API v2. Professional adds crawler error tracking through Agent Analytics. Promptwatch is rated 4.7/5 on G2. Prompt and response caps replace a pause-at-zero wallet. Pick Promptwatch when sampling is over. The reason the caps matter is that a pause-at-zero wallet stops working when you run out, while a cap-based plan keeps the dashboard live and simply stops adding new checks until the cycle resets, which is a better fit for a team that needs the report to stay visible to stakeholders between cycles.
$20 is the sample. $95 is the loop. €79 is the sitemap. That sentence is the whole comparison compressed into one line per product, and it is the line to bring into the buying meeting.
Who should pick which
Pick Rankscale to sample long-tail engines on a tiny bill.
Pick Qwairy if you insist on a cockpit screenshot.
Pick Promptwatch when sampling is over.
Do not pick Qwairy because the homepage lists 10+ names. Three of those rows are API-only in this table. Do not pick Promptwatch if 17 assistants on $20 is the actual job. Do not pick Rankscale and then ask for a publish loop. Each of those three "do not" lines is a mismatch between a buying reason and a product that does not satisfy it, and the mismatches are the most common way these comparisons go wrong in practice.
FAQ
Does Rankscale pause like Qwairy?
It burns credits at different rates by engine. The docs do not describe Qwairy's "analyses pause at zero" wallet in the same words. Budget still moves.
Is Qwairy wider than Rankscale?
No. Rankscale's 17+ on every plan is the coverage play. Qwairy's 10+ is a marketing list with API rows.