Scraping API PricesScrapingAnt vs ScrapingBee
The current volume and workload boundaries between ScrapingAnt and ScrapingBee.
ScrapingAnt
ScrapingBee
The difference
Both paths, one ruler
ScrapingAnt
Successes you want
100,000 pages
Your stated workload. Every vendor on this site is priced against this same number.
- × 1
Attempts you are billed for
100,000 requests
ScrapingAnt does not bill failed fetches, so failures cost nothing here.
- × 10
What the meter counts
1,000,000 credits
One attempt is not one billed unit here: this workload multiplies by 10 before any money is involved.
- =
Cash per month
$249.00 /mo
Business. Cheapest of every eligible purchase option, not the first plan that fits.
Bars share one linear scale across the 3 counted stages, so a multiplier shows as length. Units differ by stage and are labelled. Cash is not on that scale.
ScrapingBee
Successes you want
100,000 pages
Your stated workload. Every vendor on this site is priced against this same number.
- × 1
Attempts you are billed for
100,000 requests
ScrapingBee does not bill failed fetches, so failures cost nothing here.
- × 5
What the meter counts
500,000 credits
One attempt is not one billed unit here: this workload multiplies by 5 before any money is involved.
- =
Cash per month
$99.00 /mo
Startup. Cheapest of every eligible purchase option, not the first plan that fits.
Bars share one linear scale across the 3 counted stages, so a multiplier shows as length. Units differ by stage and are labelled. Cash is not on that scale.
Both ladders share one linear scale, topping out at 1,000,000 counted units, so a longer bar means more billed work rather than a different drawing.
These figures are for one stated workload: 100,000 JavaScript-rendered pages a month at a 95% success rate. This site has not computed a crossover volume for this pair, and does not claim one. Move the volume on either product page to see where the answer moves.
Decision boundary: for one-credit basic requests, ScrapingAnt has the lower computed bill through 100,000 requests, the bills tie from 100,001 through 250,000, and ScrapingAnt is lower again from 250,001 through 500,000. ScrapingBee is lower from 500,001 through 1,000,000, then the current public plan bills tie from 1,000,001 through their shared 8,000,000-credit ceiling. (ScrapingAnt pricing, ScrapingBee pricing, retrieved July 26, 2026)
Rendering moves the useful line because ScrapingAnt’s datacenter-plus-rendering bundle costs ten credits while ScrapingBee’s classic-plus-JavaScript bundle costs five. For rendered datacenter requests, ScrapingAnt is lower through 10,000, the bills tie from 10,001 through 50,000, ScrapingBee is lower from 50,001 through 200,000, the bills tie from 200,001 through 300,000, ScrapingBee is lower from 300,001 through 600,000, and the bills tie from 600,001 through 800,000. ScrapingBee alone has published included capacity from 800,001 through 1,600,000 rendered requests. (ScrapingAnt credit costs, ScrapingBee credit costs, retrieved July 26, 2026)
Billing models side by side
ScrapingAnt sells monthly credits. A non-rendered datacenter request costs one credit, a residential request twenty-five, a rendered datacenter request ten, and a rendered residential request one hundred twenty-five. Google targeting with datacenter access and no rendering costs ten credits. Credits do not roll over, and the pricing page does not publish a dependable numeric concurrency ceiling. (ScrapingAnt pricing, ScrapingAnt credit costs, retrieved July 26, 2026)
ScrapingBee also sells monthly credits. Classic HTML costs one credit, JavaScript five, premium proxy ten, and stealth seventy-five. An AI query adds five credits to the selected proxy mode, while specialized APIs use separate fixed costs. JavaScript is enabled by default, so a buyer seeking the one-credit classic request must disable it. Unused credits do not roll over. (ScrapingBee pricing, ScrapingBee credit costs, ScrapingBee FAQ, retrieved July 26, 2026)
ScrapingAnt describes a billable response as HTTP 200 with content and says blocked and error responses are not billed. ScrapingBee charges HTTP 200, 404, and 410 responses. Missing-page traffic can therefore change consumed credits even when both products receive the same URL list. (ScrapingAnt migration guide, ScrapingBee FAQ, retrieved July 26, 2026)
What each provides that the other does not
ScrapingAnt is the only one of this pair whose reviewed billing table exposes explicit residential and residential-plus-rendering bundles. It also markets paid plans without an enforced per-key concurrency cap, although its public error material still documents a too-many-simultaneous-requests response. (ScrapingAnt pricing, ScrapingAnt credit costs, retrieved July 26, 2026)
ScrapingBee is the only one of this pair whose reviewed billing guide exposes stealth, an additive AI-query meter, specialized Walmart and Amazon modes, and a five-credit JavaScript bundle. Those features create different credit shapes from ScrapingAnt’s four proxy-and-render combinations. (ScrapingBee credit costs, retrieved July 26, 2026)
Who should pick which
Pick ScrapingAnt in its lower basic-request bands, when explicit residential bundles are required, or when its paid-plan concurrency policy matters. Pick ScrapingBee in the 500,001-to-1,000,000 basic band, in its lower rendered-request bands, or when stealth, AI query, or specialized commerce modes are required. Use feature requirements to decide the wide tie ranges rather than forcing a single ranking. (ScrapingAnt pricing, ScrapingBee pricing, ScrapingAnt credit costs, ScrapingBee credit costs, retrieved July 26, 2026)
The main uncertainty is ScrapingAnt’s conflict between its rendered-request capacity claim and detailed credit documentation. ScrapingBee’s examples also do not fully reconcile with its stated additive AI rule. Confirm observed debits for rendered residential and AI-assisted calls before turning either set of boundaries into a plan commitment. (ScrapingAnt credit costs, ScrapingAnt pricing, ScrapingBee credit costs, retrieved July 26, 2026)