Best-in-class on-page content optimization for writers, built around SERP-derived guidance. Below: what they're good at, where we differ, and how to check every word of it yourself.
We did — we sell one of the products on this page, so read it as an argument, not a review. What we can offer instead of neutrality is checkability: every claim about another product is attributed to their own public pages, dated, and comes with instructions for verifying it without us. Found something wrong or out of date? hello@citeworthy.io and we'll fix it.
Surfer's content editor scores a draft live against terms and structure derived from what currently ranks. For a writer with a target keyword and a blank page, that loop is genuinely excellent and we do not compete with it.
Outlines, term coverage and headings pulled from the ranking set, so a brief takes minutes rather than an afternoon.
Their content audit tells an editor which existing pages to rewrite and what to add — a workflow we do not offer.
Which matters more than feature lists admit: a tool writers actually open is a tool that gets used.
We crawl what your site actually serves — status codes, headers, metadata, structured data, robots policy — and fix it. Surfer optimizes the words in a draft.
Whether GPTBot, ClaudeBot or PerplexityBot can fetch your page at all, whether your content survives without JavaScript, whether llms.txt and your markdown twins are healthy. A perfectly optimized article behind a 403 is invisible.
Approved fixes go live at the edge and come back with one click. Guidance and application are different products.
We publish a measured verdict on the changes we make — d14 and d28, per change, labelled correlation and not causation — and autonomy is earned by those verdicts rather than asserted in advance.
Our changes are served, not scripted: you point one DNS record at us and we merge approved changes into the HTML at the edge, before it leaves Cloudflare. No plugin, no script tag, no Cloudflare account of your own, no CMS deploy — and a crawler that never runs JavaScript still sees them. That also means we are a dependency of your site while the record points at us, which is a real thing to ask — so we publish exactly what we've built for our own bad days, and the fact that the exit is a DNS record you control. The operational story →
Every change we apply gets a before/after verdict at 14 and 28 days, labelled correlation rather than causation, and a fix type is only allowed to run automatically after enough settled, non-negative verdicts of that type on your site. One negative verdict pulls it back to manual approval. We could not find a published, per-change outcome verdict of this kind in the public materials of the tools on these pages — that's a statement about our search, and we'd rather be corrected than be wrong: hello@citeworthy.io.
Free, one site, no card. The fastest way to compare anything is to run both.
run a free auditThe pipeline underneath is MIT-licensed and public. The judgment layer is what we sell.
open source →