Majestic vs Semrush: two tools, two jobs
Comparing Majestic and Semrush is like comparing a scalpel to a toolbox. Semrush covers search marketing as a whole: keywords, ads, content, competition, social media. Majestic does only links.
The price gap, 46.99 € versus $139 per month, reflects this breadth difference. The question is which matches your actual work.
Pricing checked on official websites in July 2026. Semrush bills in dollars, Majestic in euros excluding VAT.
 Majestic |  Semrush | |
|---|---|---|
| Rating | ⭐ 4.2 / 5 | ⭐ 4.5 / 5 |
| Category | Marketing & SEO | Marketing & SEO |
| Pricing model | Paid | Freemium |
| From | Lite from €39.16/month (annual) or €46.99/month; Pro from €79.16/month | SEO plan from $139/month ($117.33/month annual); Starter $199/month; Pro+ $299/month; Advanced $549/month |
| Ease of use | Intermediate | Intermediate |
| French interface | Yes | Yes |
| API | Yes | Yes |
| Website | Visit → | Visit → |
The detail, criterion by criterion
Real entry price
Lite at 46.99 €/month, or 39.16 €/month annually. Complete tool from this tier.
SEO plan at $139/month, or $117.33/month annually. That's the first truly usable tier: 5 sites, 500 tracked keywords.
Functional scope
Link analysis alone: Fresh and Historic indexes, Trust Flow, Citation Flow, Topical Trust Flow, profile comparison.
Keyword research, rank tracking, technical audit, ad analysis, content ideas, competitive intelligence, social media. The broadest market coverage.
Paid ads data and competitor bids
None. That's not its subject.
Its historical strength: competitor budgets estimated, ads running, keywords bought. No purely SEO tool provides this.
Depth on backlinks
Two indexes including a Historic going back years, two separate indices to distinguish trust from volume, and the topic of incoming links.
Correct backlinks module and integrated with the rest, but less deep on history and without Topical Trust Flow equivalent.
The next tier
Pro at 94.99 €/month (79.16 € annually), 20 million analysis units.
Starter at $199/month, Pro+ at $299/month, Advanced at $549/month. Additional users billed from $45/month each.
French market
Interface in English, link data indifferent to language.
French keyword database provided, with volumes and competition. That's a real argument if you work French SEO.
Choose Majestic if…
You're a link-building consultant, you buy links or expired domains, you audit profiles. Majestic gives you the right data for 46.99 €/month, and its Historic index saves you from buying a domain with a questionable past.
Choose Semrush if…
You steer acquisition as a whole, SEO and ads combined, on the French-speaking market. Semrush replaces four subscriptions and its French keyword database is solid. At $139/month, it's pricey, but that's one line item.
Our verdict
These two tools don't oppose, they complement. The question is your budget and scope.
Tight budget and work centred on links: Majestic Lite, no hesitation. You get better link data than Semrush for a third of the price.
Overall acquisition to steer, including paid and French keywords: Semrush SEO plan. You won't find competitor ad data anywhere else.
And if your job is really link building, the most effective combination remains Semrush for oversight and Majestic for deep link analysis. That's an agency budget, not a junior freelancer's.
Frequently asked questions
Is Semrush enough to analyse backlinks?
For routine monitoring, yes. For professional link-building work, its data is shallower than Majestic's, especially on a domain's history and topic of incoming links.
Why is Semrush so expensive?
Because it aggregates paid data from multiple markets, including ads, and practically replaces several subscriptions. The math is yours to do based on what you use: if you only open the SEO module, value for money degrades quickly.
Are prices in euros or dollars?
Semrush displays pricing in US dollars, Majestic in euros excluding VAT. Think about VAT and exchange rate in your real budget calculation.
We look at what you actually need and tell you which one to set up (or a third that fits better).
Ask us →