Scraping API PricesScrapingBee vs Scrapingdog
The current volume and workload boundaries between ScrapingBee and Scrapingdog.
ScrapingBee
ScrapingDog
The difference
Both paths, one ruler
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.
ScrapingDog
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
ScrapingDog 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
$90.00 /mo
Standard. 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 500,000 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 basic requests, Scrapingdog has the lower computed bill through 200,000 requests, ScrapingBee has it from 200,001 through 250,000, and Scrapingdog has it again from 250,001 through ScrapingBee’s last public allowance of 8,000,000. The fifty-thousand-request ScrapingBee interval is created by the entry-plan capacities. It is not a general product verdict. (ScrapingBee pricing, Scrapingdog pricing, retrieved July 26, 2026)
The same plan-step pattern applies to five-credit JavaScript requests at one fifth of those request volumes because both vendors publish a five-credit JavaScript meter. It does not apply to Amazon, Google, stealth, or AI workloads. Scrapingdog lists Amazon at one credit and Google Search at five, while ScrapingBee lists normal Amazon at fifteen, normal Google at fifteen in its detailed examples, and stealth at seventy-five. (ScrapingBee credit costs, Scrapingdog documentation, retrieved July 26, 2026)
Billing models side by side
ScrapingBee uses monthly credits. Classic HTML costs one credit, JavaScript five, premium proxy ten, and stealth seventy-five. Its AI query adds five credits to the selected proxy mode, while specialized APIs use fixed target costs. JavaScript is enabled by default, so obtaining the classic one-credit meter requires disabling it. Unused credits do not roll over. (ScrapingBee pricing, ScrapingBee credit costs, ScrapingBee FAQ, retrieved July 26, 2026)
Scrapingdog also uses monthly credits. Its public table starts with one-credit basic and Amazon requests, then publishes separate costs for rendering, premium proxy, screenshots, AI extraction, search result types, commerce sites, social sites, and LinkedIn request types. The public plan ladder continues through much larger allowances than ScrapingBee’s self-serve table. Credits do not roll over. (Scrapingdog pricing, Scrapingdog documentation, retrieved July 26, 2026)
ScrapingBee charges HTTP 200, 404, and 410 responses. Scrapingdog says failed requests are never charged but does not provide a complete billable-status list. A migration model should therefore keep an error-status row rather than assuming both vendors debit the same events. (ScrapingBee FAQ, Scrapingdog pricing, retrieved July 26, 2026)
What each provides that the other does not
ScrapingBee is the only one of this pair whose reviewed billing guide defines a dedicated stealth bundle and an explicitly additive AI-query charge. It also documents a specialized ChatGPT API and distinguishes light from normal Google, Walmart, and Amazon calls. (ScrapingBee credit costs, retrieved July 26, 2026)
Scrapingdog is the only one of this pair whose reviewed meter table lists screenshot, eBay, LinkedIn, Twitter, TikTok, YouTube, Google Maps, Google News, Google Trends, and Google Images endpoints. Its public plan ladder also extends beyond ScrapingBee’s last self-serve allowance. (Scrapingdog documentation, Scrapingdog pricing, retrieved July 26, 2026)
Who should pick which
Pick ScrapingBee when the forecast lands in the narrow 200,001 to 250,000 basic-request band, or when a documented stealth bundle and additive AI query are core requirements. Pick Scrapingdog below or above that band when calls remain basic, or when its named target endpoints avoid paying a generic proxy or extraction multiplier for the job. For rendered calls, divide the basic boundaries by five before matching them to plan capacities. (ScrapingBee pricing, Scrapingdog pricing, ScrapingBee credit costs, Scrapingdog documentation, retrieved July 26, 2026)
The unresolved issue is combination logic. ScrapingBee’s guide mixes replacement bundles with an additive AI meter, and Scrapingdog does not fully define how country, endpoint, AI, rendering, and proxy costs combine. Confirm a sample debit for every request shape that materially contributes to the forecast before treating the boundary as final. (ScrapingBee credit costs, Scrapingdog documentation, retrieved July 26, 2026)