Lumar vs Treo in 2026: enterprise AI-and-accessibility platform vs the CrUX-first Core Web Vitals specialist
Lumar treats site speed as one of five modules in a demo-gated enterprise contract. Treo treats it as the whole product, real-user Chrome UX Report data with published pricing that starts free and scales to $375 a month.
Lumar
Treo- Treo pulls real-user field data from the Chrome UX Report alongside Lighthouse lab scores. Lumar's site speed module is not publicly detailed as CrUX-based.
- Lumar tracks brand visibility across ChatGPT, Gemini, and Perplexity as part of its platform. Treo has no AI answer-engine visibility tracking of any kind.
- Treo has a free tier for a single site and publishes every price up to $375 a month. Lumar has no public pricing and requires a sales demo before you see a number.
- Treo automatically discovers URLs through sitemap scanning with no script installation required, and supports competitive benchmarking against named competitor domains.
- Lumar is the only one of the two with WCAG 2.2 accessibility compliance testing and full technical SEO crawling for canonicals, hreflang, and redirects.
- Treo offers API access from its $75-a-month Vital tier up, aimed at teams piping CrUX data into Looker Studio or client portals.
Lumar and Treo both monitor Core Web Vitals, but that is a small slice of what either tool is actually built to do. Lumar wraps site speed monitoring into a five-part enterprise platform alongside AI brand visibility tracking across ChatGPT, Gemini, and Perplexity, WCAG 2.2 accessibility testing, and full technical SEO crawling, sold with no public price and a required demo. Treo does one thing and does it with real-world data: it pulls field performance from the Chrome UX Report rather than relying only on synthetic Lighthouse scores, adds automated sitemap discovery and competitive benchmarking, and publishes a price ladder that starts at free. If Core Web Vitals monitoring is genuinely the whole requirement, Treo is built for exactly that job. If speed needs to sit in the same report as AI visibility and accessibility compliance, Lumar is solving a bigger problem.
The tools at a glance
Lumar
Enterprise website optimization combining technical SEO, AI visibility, and accessibility
Lumar (formerly DeepCrawl) bundles Core Web Vitals monitoring with four other modules under one enterprise contract: technical SEO crawling with AI-powered issue prioritization, AI brand visibility tracking for GEO and AEO, WCAG 2.2 accessibility testing, and custom analytics with AI-generated remediation code. Speed monitoring here is one part of a larger platform rather than the reason to buy it.
The AI visibility layer, tracking how a brand appears in ChatGPT, Gemini, and Perplexity answers, and the WCAG 2.2 accessibility testing are the two things Treo has no equivalent for at all. For an enterprise team that already needs crawling and accessibility compliance handled somewhere, having site speed data live in the same platform avoids a fourth or fifth vendor relationship.
What Lumar does not publish is the kind of methodology detail Treo leads with. Its own materials describe Core Web Vitals tracking, Lighthouse audits, and page load timings, but do not state whether the underlying data source is real-user Chrome UX Report data or synthetic testing, so teams that care specifically about field-versus-lab distinctions should confirm that directly in the demo.
| Feature | Enterprise Contact for pricing |
|---|---|
| Technical SEO crawling | ✓ |
| AI brand visibility (GEO/AEO) tracking | ✓ |
| WCAG 2.2 accessibility testing | ✓ |
| Core Web Vitals monitoring | ✓ |
| API access | Yes, for data export |
| Self-serve signup | No, demo required |
Treo
Core Web Vitals monitoring using real-world Chrome UX Report data
Treo is a site speed monitoring platform built specifically around Core Web Vitals, and its main differentiator is the data source: field data from the Chrome UX Report, reflecting how real Chrome users experienced your pages over the past 28 days, displayed alongside Lighthouse lab scores. A page can look fine in a lab test while real users still experience slow LCP, and Treo is built to catch that gap.
Sitemap scanning discovers URLs automatically with no script to install, competitive benchmarking lets you track named competitor domains side by side with your own scores, and a multi-site dashboard scales to hundreds of domains for agencies managing a portfolio of clients. The API, available from the Vital tier up, is meant for teams piping CrUX data into Looker Studio or their own client-facing dashboards.
What it will not do is crawl your site for canonicals or hreflang errors, track AI search visibility, or test accessibility, it is a single-purpose performance tool, not a platform. Pricing also jumps sharply after the free tier, from $0 to $75 a month for the Vital plan, which is a real barrier for a solo practitioner monitoring just one or two sites.
| Feature | Free $0/month | Vital $75/month | Pro $185/month | Scale $375/month | Enterprise Contact for pricing |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sites monitored | 1 | Up to 5 | Up to 15 | Up to 50 | Custom |
| CrUX field data | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Lighthouse audits | Limited | Hourly | Hourly | Hourly | Custom |
| Competitive benchmarking | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| API access | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Head-to-head feature comparison
| Feature | Lumar | Treo |
|---|---|---|
| Full-site technical SEO crawl | Yes | No |
| AI brand visibility (GEO/AEO) tracking | Yes (ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity) | No |
| Real-user Chrome UX Report (CrUX) data | Not publicly detailed | Yes, its core data source |
| Lighthouse lab audits | Yes | Yes |
| Competitive performance benchmarking | Not publicly detailed | Yes (Vital tier and above) |
| WCAG 2.2 accessibility testing | Yes (WCAG 2.2) | No |
| Automated sitemap / URL discovery | Not publicly detailed | Yes, via sitemap scanning |
| Multi-site dashboard | Not publicly detailed | Yes |
| API access | Yes, for data export | Yes (Vital tier and above) |
| Self-serve signup (no sales call) | No (demo required) | Yes |
| Free tier | No | Yes (1 site, limited Lighthouse) |
| Starting price | Custom (sales-led) | Free ($75/mo for multi-site) |
Considering AI Peekaboo alongside Lumar and Treo?
Lumar bundles AI brand visibility tracking for ChatGPT, Gemini, and Perplexity into an enterprise contract that starts with a demo and has no public price. Treo has no AI search visibility tracking at all, it stays entirely inside Core Web Vitals and performance data. If AI answer-engine visibility is the actual requirement rather than a bundled extra, AI Peekaboo ships a dedicated read and write API on every plan from $50 a month, tracks five named AI surfaces, and includes white-label delivery without a sales call, worth evaluating alongside either tool.
Read the AI Peekaboo review →Which should you choose?
LumarTreoTreoLumarLumarTreoLumarThis is a scope mismatch more than a head-to-head fight. Lumar treats Core Web Vitals as one input among five, wrapped in an enterprise sales process that only makes sense once an organization needs the other four modules too. Treo treats Core Web Vitals as the entire product, and the specificity shows: real CrUX field data, automated sitemap discovery, and named-competitor benchmarking, all with a price you can see before you sign anything. A team that picks Lumar purely for its speed monitoring is paying for four modules it may not use; a team that picks Treo expecting crawl or accessibility coverage will not find it.
Bottom line
Book the Lumar demo if Core Web Vitals monitoring needs to sit in the same enterprise platform as AI visibility tracking, WCAG 2.2 accessibility testing, and full technical crawling. Start Treo on its free tier if Core Web Vitals is the actual, standalone requirement, its real-user CrUX data and competitive benchmarking go deeper into that specific problem than Lumar's public materials describe, and the paid tiers scale cleanly from $75 to $375 a month as your site portfolio grows. Pair Treo with a dedicated crawler like Screaming Frog if you also need full technical SEO auditing without committing to Lumar's enterprise contract.
Frequently asked questions
Is Treo a good substitute for Lumar's Core Web Vitals monitoring?
For Core Web Vitals specifically, yes, Treo's use of real-user Chrome UX Report data alongside Lighthouse scores is more explicitly documented than what Lumar publishes about its own speed module. What Treo does not replace is Lumar's technical SEO crawling, AI brand visibility tracking, or WCAG 2.2 accessibility testing, none of which Treo offers.
Does Treo track AI search visibility the way Lumar does?
No, Treo has no AI brand visibility or GEO/AEO tracking feature. It is a single-purpose performance monitoring tool focused entirely on Core Web Vitals and Lighthouse data, which is a different problem from tracking how a brand appears in ChatGPT or Gemini answers.
What is the actual difference between CrUX field data and the Lighthouse scores most tools show?
CrUX, the Chrome UX Report, is aggregated data from real Chrome users reflecting actual field performance over the past 28 days, while Lighthouse scores come from synthetic lab tests run under controlled conditions. Treo shows both side by side, which lets you see when a Lighthouse score improves but real users are not actually experiencing faster load times, a gap that a lab-only tool would miss entirely.
Why does Lumar have no public pricing while Treo publishes a full price ladder?
Lumar sells as a custom-configured enterprise platform spanning crawling, AI visibility, accessibility, and speed, which typically means negotiated per-contract pricing rather than a published list. Treo sells as a focused, self-serve product, so its full range, free for one site up to $375 a month for 50 sites, is visible without a sales call.
Can Treo monitor competitor websites alongside my own?
Yes, competitive benchmarking is available from the $75-a-month Vital tier up, letting you add competitor domains and compare their Core Web Vitals scores against your own using the same CrUX data source. This is useful for client reporting where showing your improvement against a category leader adds context that a standalone number does not.
Is Treo's free tier actually usable, or is it just a trial?
It is a genuinely usable free tier, not a time-limited trial, covering one site with real CrUX field data and limited Lighthouse audits at no cost. The limitation is scale: you need the $75-a-month Vital plan or higher to monitor multiple sites, add competitive benchmarking, or get API access.