Oncrawl vs Treo in 2026: full-site crawl and log platform vs focused Core Web Vitals monitoring
Oncrawl covers crawl data, server logs, and AI bot tracking at enterprise pricing with a required demo. Treo does one job, real-world Core Web Vitals monitoring using Chrome UX Report data, and starts free.
Oncrawl
Treo- Treo pulls field data directly from the Chrome UX Report to show how real Chrome users experienced a page over the past 28 days, alongside Lighthouse lab scores; Oncrawl does not track Core Web Vitals or CrUX data at all.
- Oncrawl analyzes server logs to show exactly which URLs Googlebot and AI bots like GPTBot and ClaudeBot are crawling, and monitors whether pages are cited in AI-generated answers; Treo has neither log analysis nor AI bot tracking.
- Treo has a genuine free tier for single-site monitoring, with paid plans starting at $75/month for up to 5 sites; Oncrawl has no free tier and no public pricing at all, access requires a sales demo.
- Treo discovers URLs automatically by reading a site's sitemap, with no script installation required; Oncrawl runs full technical crawls covering broken links, redirect chains, canonicalization, hreflang, and structured data, a much broader audit scope.
- Both tools offer competitive benchmarking, but of different things: Treo benchmarks Core Web Vitals scores against competitor domains, while Oncrawl has no documented competitive benchmarking feature at all.
- Treo scored 8.2/10 in our review, the highest of any tool in this comparison, driven by ease of use and value for money; Oncrawl scored 8.0/10, driven by features and API depth.
- Both tools offer API access for piping data into external reporting, Treo from the Vital plan up at $75/month, Oncrawl only after a sales conversation with no published pricing.
Oncrawl and Treo already show up in each other's related-tools lists, and it is easy to see why: both are Technical SEO category tools a site owner might reach for when Core Web Vitals or crawl health is a concern. But they solve that concern at very different depths. Oncrawl is a full crawl-and-log platform, it audits technical SEO issues across a site, ingests server logs to show exactly what Googlebot and AI bots are visiting, and layers in AI-generated answer visibility monitoring. Treo does one thing and does it cleanly: it pulls real-world Core Web Vitals data from the Chrome UX Report alongside Lighthouse lab scores, with sitemap-based URL discovery and competitive benchmarking against named domains. Oncrawl requires a sales demo and discloses no pricing; Treo has a working free tier and a clear price ladder up to $375/month. The decision mostly comes down to whether you need a broad crawl-and-log platform or a narrow, cheap way to watch Core Web Vitals.
The tools at a glance
Oncrawl
Cloud-based technical SEO platform combining crawl data, log analysis, and AI bot tracking.
Oncrawl treats crawl data, server logs, and performance data as one connected dataset rather than three separate reports. The log analysis layer is where it earns its reputation: upload server logs and it maps precisely which URLs Googlebot and AI crawlers are visiting, how often, and where crawl budget is being spent on pages that do not deserve it.
The platform runs full technical crawls too, covering broken links, redirect chains, canonical tags, hreflang, page depth, and structured data across sites with millions of URLs. It has also added AI bot crawl tracking for GPTBot, ClaudeBot, and PerplexityBot, plus a layer that checks whether pages are actually being cited in AI-generated answers, not just whether AI bots can reach them.
None of that touches Core Web Vitals or field performance data, Oncrawl's feature list does not mention CrUX or Lighthouse scoring at all. Access is enterprise-only: no self-serve signup, no public price, and a demo is required before you see a number, which puts it out of reach for a team that just wants to watch page speed trends.
| Feature | Enterprise Contact for pricing |
|---|---|
| Pricing model | Custom |
Treo
Core Web Vitals monitoring using real-world Chrome UX Report data.
Treo is built specifically around Core Web Vitals, and it makes a point of using real data rather than lab approximations. It pulls field data from the Chrome UX Report, reflecting how actual Chrome users experienced a page over the last 28 days, and pairs it with Lighthouse lab scores so you can tell the difference between "our lab score improved" and "real users are actually loading faster."
Setup is close to zero-effort: point Treo at a domain and it reads the sitemap to discover URLs automatically, no tagging or script installation required. Competitive benchmarking lets you track CrUX scores against named competitor domains, and a multi-site dashboard makes it practical for an agency running Core Web Vitals checks across a large client portfolio.
The trade-off shows up in the free-to-paid jump: the Free tier covers one site, but Vital jumps to $75/month for up to 5 sites with hourly Lighthouse audits and competitive benchmarking unlocked. Treo also has a narrower scope than Oncrawl by design, it does not crawl for broken links or structured data issues, and it has no server log analysis or AI bot tracking of any kind.
| 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 | Oncrawl | Treo |
|---|---|---|
| Overall score | 8.0 / 10 | 8.2 / 10 |
| Site crawling & technical audits | Yes, core feature | No |
| Server log analysis | Yes, core feature | No |
| AI bot crawl tracking | Yes (GPTBot, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot) | No |
| AI-generated answer citation monitoring | Yes, dedicated layer | No |
| Real-world CrUX / Core Web Vitals data | No | Yes, core feature |
| Lighthouse lab audits | No | Yes, hourly on paid plans |
| Sitemap-based URL discovery | No | Yes, automatic |
| Competitive benchmarking | No, not documented | Yes, against competitor domains |
| Multi-site dashboard | Not documented as a feature | Yes |
| API access | Yes, REST API | Yes, Vital plan and up |
| Free tier | No | Yes, 1 site |
| Starting price | Contact for pricing | $75/mo (paid tiers) |
Neither Treo nor Oncrawl track AI answer citations the way a dedicated tool does, and Oncrawl gates it behind an enterprise contract.
Treo is entirely focused on Core Web Vitals and has no AI search visibility feature of any kind. Oncrawl does track whether pages are cited in AI-generated answers, which is a real capability, but it only comes bundled inside a full enterprise crawl-and-log platform behind a sales demo. AI Peekaboo covers that specific job on its own, tracking brand mentions across ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, and Google AI Overviews as a self-serve product from $50/month with a read and write API on every plan.
Read the AI Peekaboo review →Which should you choose?
OncrawlTreoOncrawlTreoOncrawlTreoOncrawl and Treo appear in each other's related-tools lists for a reason: both get pulled into Technical SEO shortlists, but they answer different-sized questions. Treo answers how Core Web Vitals are trending for a set of sites and how they compare to competitors, cheaply and with almost no setup. Oncrawl answers a much bigger question involving crawl budget, log verification, and whether AI bots are actually reading and citing your content, at enterprise pricing and with real configuration overhead. A team whose only pain point is Core Web Vitals does not need Oncrawl's log analysis; a team with crawl budget or AI bot visibility problems will not find an answer in Treo.
Bottom line
Start with Treo's free tier if Core Web Vitals monitoring is the actual need, it costs nothing for a single site and the Vital plan at $75/month covers up to five with competitive benchmarking unlocked. Book the Oncrawl demo only once the problem is bigger than page speed: crawl budget waste, log-verified indexation issues, or AI bot and citation tracking at scale. Running both is not unreasonable for an agency managing large client sites, since they do not actually overlap in what they measure.
Frequently asked questions
Is Treo or Oncrawl better for monitoring Core Web Vitals across multiple client sites?
Treo is purpose-built for this: it discovers URLs automatically via sitemap scanning and its multi-site dashboard is designed for agencies tracking Core Web Vitals across a large client portfolio, starting at $75/month for up to 5 sites. Oncrawl does not document Core Web Vitals or CrUX monitoring as part of its feature set at all.
Does Treo require installing tracking code on a site to get Core Web Vitals data?
Treo does not require any script installation, it uses public Chrome UX Report data from Google combined with on-demand Lighthouse audits. Oncrawl works differently since it needs uploaded server log files to power its crawl and log analysis, which is a heavier setup than Treo's sitemap-based approach.
Can Oncrawl replace Treo for Core Web Vitals tracking?
Oncrawl's documented feature set covers crawl data, server log analysis, and AI bot tracking, but it does not include Core Web Vitals or CrUX field data monitoring, so it cannot replace a dedicated tool like Treo for that specific job. Teams that need both crawl/log analysis and Core Web Vitals tracking will need to run separate tools.
Is Treo worth it for a single-site business, or is the free tier enough?
The free tier is enough for a single site if limited Lighthouse audits and CrUX field data are all you need, since Treo's Free plan covers exactly one site at no cost. Paid plans only become necessary once you need competitive benchmarking, hourly Lighthouse audits, or monitoring across more than one domain.
Which tool tracks how AI bots like GPTBot crawl a site?
Oncrawl tracks crawl activity from AI bots including GPTBot, ClaudeBot, and PerplexityBot at the URL level, and separately monitors whether pages are cited in AI-generated answers. Treo has no AI bot tracking or AI answer citation feature, its scope is limited to Core Web Vitals and Lighthouse performance data.
Is there a cheaper way to track AI answer citations than Oncrawl's enterprise platform?
AI Peekaboo tracks brand mentions across ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, and Google AI Overviews as a self-serve product starting at $50/month with a read and write API on every plan, no sales demo required. Oncrawl's AI-generated answer visibility feature covers similar ground but only as part of a full enterprise crawl platform with contact-only pricing, and Treo has no AI citation tracking at all.