Disclaimer: The reviews and comparisons in this article reflect our independent professional opinions and are provided for informational purposes only. We have aimed to remain objective and unbiased. Nothing here is intended to disparage or defame any company or product. Readers should conduct their own due diligence and verify details via official sources.
Most teams end up on Moz Pro vs Spyfu when they’re trying to answer two different questions with one tool: “How do we improve our SEO foundation?” versus “What are competitors doing that we can copy (or counter) fast?”
Moz Pro is built for the first job. It’s an SEO suite that’s strongest when your weekly loop is: pick targets → fix technical issues → build authority → track rankings. In practice, it shines on the “owned-site” side of SEO: Keyword Explorer, Link Explorer, rank tracking, and crawling/site health workflows that keep a program consistent.
Spyfu is built for the second job. It’s competitor intel first, especially around PPC and the keywords competitors repeatedly spend on. The day-to-day value is speed: you can pull competitor keyword lists, ad history patterns, and overlap (“who’s bidding/ranking where”) to get to a testable plan quickly.
The layer that keeps this honest is outcomes. A tool is only useful if it supports essential digital marketing tools decisions inside a real marketing funnel for local businesses, and if it helps you pick digital marketing strategies for small businesses you can actually execute weekly (not just report on).
At-a-glance: Moz Pro vs Spyfu
If you need a quick orientation, Spyfu vs Moz Pro is really “competitive intel first” versus “site SEO execution first.” Spyfu is built to show what competitors are doing in SEO and PPC, shared keywords (Kombat), keyword overlap, and ad history, so you can reverse-engineer what’s already working and decide where to compete.
Moz Pro is closer to a classic SEO toolkit: keyword research, rank tracking, site auditing/crawling, and link analysis that helps you keep a campaign healthy over time. It’s the better fit when your job is to improve your own site week after week (and report progress), not just study competitors. (Target Internet)
In a marketing funnel for local businesses, Spyfu often helps you validate demand faster, while Moz Pro tends to support steadier digital marketing strategies for small businesses that rely on consistent site improvements and measurable SEO execution.
Parameter 1: Use-Case Fit (Moz Pro vs Spyfu)
Moz Pro vs Spyfu isn’t really “which is better?”, it’s which weekly workflow you’re running.
- Moz Pro is a classic SEO suite: keyword research, rank tracking, site crawling/audits, and link analysis, built around running SEO as a repeatable program.
- Spyfu is competitive intelligence first: it’s strongest when you’re reverse-engineering competitors’ SEO + PPC (especially overlap/gap analysis) to decide what to target next.
That difference matters a lot if you’re building a marketing funnel for local businesses, testing Google Ads for local leads, or deciding which digital marketing strategies for small businesses to prioritize using essential digital marketing tools.
| Pointer | Moz Pro | Spyfu |
| Core strength | “Run SEO like a system” (research → crawl/audit → track → report) | “Steal what works” (competitors’ keywords, ads, overlap, history) |
| Best-fit team | In-house SEO, content + SEO teams, agencies needing dependable SEO ops | Growth marketers, PPC teams, founders/SMBs who want fast competitor insights |
| Default weekly cadence | Crawl issues + priorities, track rankings, build keyword lists, monitor authority/link signals | Run competitor comparisons (e.g., SEO Kombat), pull target lists, and map “what they rank for that we don’t.” |
| “Fastest win” use-case | Keeping site health + rankings stable while content scales (good for ongoing SEO hygiene) | Finding gaps and opportunities fast (especially when you’re translating search engine marketing terms into targets and campaigns) |
| Practical differentiator | Better when you need an SEO operating rhythm (campaigns/projects + audits + tracking) | Better when your edge is competitor intel (overlap, gaps, ad + keyword angles) |
Parameter 2: Keyword Research & Intent
This is where Moz Pro vs Spyfu usually separates fast in real workflows. Moz Pro is built for picking targets you can actually rank for, using Keyword Explorer-style prioritization (difficulty + CTR/opportunity-style thinking) so you don’t walk into a “high-volume, no-click” trap.
Spyfu is built for competitive keyword intelligence, especially “what are they ranking for / bidding on, and how long have they been doing it?”, so your keyword list is anchored in competitor reality, not just keyword math.
| Pointer | Moz Pro | Spyfu |
| Target selection: choose keywords you can win, not just big numbers. | Strong prioritization mindset (difficulty + CTR/opportunity signals). | Strong “prove it with competitors” mindset (who ranks/bids and for how long). |
| Competitor keyword reality: see what actually drives rivals’ visibility. | Competitive context exists, but it’s less “ad-history-first.” | Core strength: competitor-first SEO + PPC keyword discovery. |
| Overlap/gap workflows: find shared and unique keywords between sites. | More “research → shortlist → track” than war-room gap tooling. | Kombat-style overlap views make gaps obvious quickly. |
| PPC lens: when paid data should influence SEO priorities. | Helpful for SEO planning; PPC insight is not the main engine. | Built to connect SEO and Google Ads intent via competitor bidding signals. |
| Workflow speed: from seed keyword to an actionable plan. | Best when you want a defensible shortlist with fewer false positives. | Best when you want “competitor-backed” targets and fast expansion. |
Parameter 3: PPC Intelligence & Lead Validation
If you’re using paid search as a “truth serum,” this is where Moz Pro vs Spyfu separates fast. Spyfu is built to reverse-engineer what competitors are actively buying on Google Ads, down to historical ad copy and keywords, so you can pressure-test how to generate local leads before you sink weeks into SEO.
Moz Pro isn’t a PPC intelligence tool. It’s better at helping you choose and execute organic targets (difficulty, Organic CTR, “Priority” scoring) than at measuring progress over time.
| Pointer | Moz Pro | Spyfu |
| Best use | Build an organic plan you can execute consistently. | Validate demand + messaging fast with Google Ads for local leads and competitor intel. |
| Competitor ad transparency | Not designed for ad-copy history research. | Ad History shows historical ads and keywords competitors ran over long periods. |
| Shortcut to “what works.” | SEO-first: pick keywords/pages to create or improve. | See recurring ad copy + keywords (signals what keeps converting). |
| Competitive overlap | Compete via organic benchmarks and link metrics. | Kombat highlights overlapping/unique keywords across competitors. |
| Practical output | A prioritized SEO roadmap and tracking loop. | A paid-validation loop: keyword → ad copy → landing page test → keep winners. |
Parameter 4: Technical SEO & Site Auditing (Website Crawling Capabilities)
This is the point where Moz Pro vs Spyfu stops being “which tool has more data?” and becomes “which tool actually helps me fix the site?”
If you’re dealing with real technical SEO work, broken internal links, redirect chains, duplicate titles, thin pages, crawl traps, you need a crawler-based audit. Moz Pro is built for that inside a Moz Pro Campaign (with Site Crawl and audit-style issue lists you can turn into tasks).
Spyfu, by contrast, is primarily a competitive intelligence platform (keywords, PPC history, overlap, and competitor-driven insights). Even when people search for a Spyfu SEO Audit Tool, what you’ll typically find is that Spyfu isn’t positioned as a deep site crawler the way Moz Pro is; teams often pair Spyfu with a dedicated crawler/auditor.
| Pointer | Spyfu | Moz Pro |
| Crawling depth: true site crawler vs research-first platform | Limited Spyfu Website Crawling Capabilities compared to dedicated auditors; strongest for competitor intel. | Built-in crawler via Site Crawl inside Campaigns for technical issue discovery. |
| Actionability: Can you turn findings into a fix list fast? | You’ll usually export insights and manage fixes elsewhere; Spyfu Technical SEO Capabilities aren’t the core product. | Audit findings are naturally “task-shaped” (crawl issues → prioritize → re-crawl). |
| Reporting output: “SEO audit report” deliverables | Great for competitive reporting (who’s buying what, ranking overlap, etc.). | Greater for a client/team-facing SEO Site Audit Moz Pro style deliverable (crawl issues + tracked improvements). |
| Best-fit reality: what breaks first in the real week | If you need deep technical cleanup, you’ll hit the ceiling and add another tool. | If you need consistent technical hygiene, Moz Pro is built to be the weekly audit loop. |
| Bottom line | Choose Spyfu here only if “audit” means light checks and your main need is competitive intel. | Choose Moz Pro if you need a repeatable crawl → fix → verify loop and a clear Moz Pro SEO Audit Report workflow. |
Parameter 5: Backlink Intelligence & Link Building Workflow
This is where Moz Pro feels like “link quality + risk signals,” and Spyfu feels like “link opportunities from competitors”.
Moz Pro’s link layer is tied to its “authority” worldview; people commonly look for domain authority Moz Pro and spam analysis Moz Pro when they’re trying to judge link quality and risk at a glance. (You’ll also still see legacy searches for Moz Pro Open Site Explorer, even though the link product is positioned today as Link Explorer in most descriptions.)
Spyfu’s link layer is more opportunity-driven: it emphasizes finding competitor link sources and building lists (you’ll see it framed as a Spyfu backlink checker/backlinks workflow and “builder” style features in Spyfu’s own materials).
| Pointer | Moz Pro | Spyfu |
| Best at | Evaluating link quality signals + diagnosing risky patterns (the “should we trust this?” lens) | Finding backlink opportunities by looking at who supports competitors (the “who should link to us?” lens) |
| Competitive gap approach | More “analyze + export + plan” (strong for research, less outreach-pipeline built-in) | Kombat-style overlap thinking + backlink discovery to identify shared and missing opportunities |
| Link building workflow | Supports link research and reporting; execution typically happens in your outreach stack | More “list/build” oriented in how Spyfu describes backlink workflows (builder + discovery angle) |
| Risk + trust framing | Stronger fit when backlinks tie into online reputation management (avoid sketchy sources, keep the profile clean) | Stronger fit when you’re building “who links to them” shortlists for outreach and partnerships |
| Keyword, you’ll see people search | Moz Pro link building, spam analysis, Moz Pro, domain authority Moz Pro | Spyfu backlink, Spyfu backlink checker, and even “Spyfu link building service reviews” when people are evaluating the outreach angle |
Parameter 6: Technical SEO & Auditing Depth (Moz Pro vs Spyfu)
Technical SEO is where “we lost traffic” turns into a fix list you can actually execute. In my day-to-day use, Moz Pro behaves like a true site-crawling workflow (crawl → prioritize → fix → recrawl → report), while Spyfu is primarily a competitive research and tracking tool, so if you’re looking for “Spyfu SEO Audit Tool” depth, you usually end up pairing Spyfu with a dedicated crawler.
This matters even more now because the Google AI Overview SEO Impact is real: if your pages are slow, blocked, or poorly structured, you don’t just lose rankings, you lose eligibility for richer SERP visibility.
| Pointer | Moz Pro | Spyfu |
| Crawl-first workflow: how the tool finds issues | Site Crawl is designed to scan your site and surface technical/on-page issues inside a campaign workflow. | Spyfu doesn’t position itself as a full crawling auditor; it’s positioned around SEO/PPC keyword and competitor insights. |
| Issue prioritization: turning findings into an action list | Audit output is meant to drive execution: prioritize issues, fix them, then validate with a recrawl (good for a weekly cadence). | If you’re searching for Spyfu technical SEO capabilities or Spyfu website crawling capabilities, think “limited/adjacent”; Spyfu helps you decide what to target, not crawl your whole site to find every technical blocker. |
| Progress tracking: proving fixes worked | Recrawls + reporting are part of the loop (useful for a “before/after” technical SEO story). | Spyfu’s “project” layer is more about monitoring keywords and competitive movement than technical remediation tracking. |
| Where it fits in an AI SEO Strategy | Strong when your strategy depends on removing technical friction (crawlability, indexation, internal linking hygiene, thin/duplicate signals). | Strong when your strategy depends on competitive discovery (what competitors rank for, what ads they run, which keywords are realistic). |
| Best-fit reality | Best when you want SEO Site Audit Moz Pro to be a repeatable operating system inside a campaign. | Best when you want competitive intel + tracking, and you’ll use another tool for deep audits, even if people search terms like “Spyfu SEO Audit” or “Spyfu SEO Audit Tool.” |
Parameter 7: Rank Tracking & Reporting
Rank tracking is where “SEO work” becomes a weekly habit or a forgotten tab. The real difference isn’t just who tracks rankings, it’s who turns movement into a repeatable report that leads to action.
In Spyfu, tracking is built around MySpyfu keyword groups, and it automatically tracks your domain’s organic ranking (and paid ad position) each week in Google and Bing, which is great for a steady, low-maintenance cadence.
Moz Pro’s approach is more campaign-based: you set up a Campaign, add keywords, and monitor whether pages are moving up or down, cleaner for teams that want tracking without building a custom reporting stack.
| Pointer | Moz Pro | Spyfu |
| Tracking mindset: campaign monitoring vs lightweight weekly tracking | Built around Campaign-style rank monitoring (often paired with other Moz Pro workflows). | Weekly tracking via MySpyfu keyword groups; includes organic + paid position tracking. |
| Cadence fit: daily ops teams vs weekly “check → act” loops | Strong when rank tracking is part of a broader campaign workflow and reporting rhythm. | Strong for consistent weekly visibility without heavy setup or maintenance. |
| Reporting usefulness: what answers “what changed and what do we do?” | Better when you want tracking tied to structured SEO workstreams (and stakeholder-ready summaries). | Better for simple, repeatable rank reporting across keyword groups (easy to keep running). |
| Best use: rank tracking as a system vs a signal | Best when rank tracking needs to plug into a broader SEO operating cadence. | Best when you want an always-on rank signal you can review weekly and move on. |
Parameter 8: Local SEO, Leads & “What Converts”
Local SEO isn’t just “rank higher.” It’s how to generate local leads reliably: show up for high-intent queries, earn trust, and convert clicks on the page. That’s also where online reputation management and how to get more positive reviews stop being “nice-to-have” and become conversion levers.
In practice, Moz Pro helps more on the organic side (tracking + on-page + links). Spyfu helps more on the validation side, especially Google Ads for local leads, competitor PPC patterns, and which keywords have proven commercial intent.
| Pointer | Moz Pro | Spyfu |
| Local visibility: track local intent keywords and measure movement consistently. | Strong for organic monitoring inside campaigns; useful for local keyword sets. | Tracks rankings weekly in Google/Bing; useful baseline, lighter than a full local stack. |
| Lead validation: prove intent fast before waiting for SEO compounding. | Better for SEO execution (fix + publish + earn links), slower validation loop. | Clear edge for PPC intel + competitor ads history to validate offers quickly. |
| Reputation impact: reviews and trust signals change conversion rates post-click. | Helps find pages to improve; reputation work happens outside the tool. | Helps identify competitor positioning; reputation work is still operational/outside. |
| E-commerce-local crossover: local product listing optimization needs more than “SEO tools.” | Can support category/product SEO planning; not a product-feed manager. | Useful for spotting paid + organic keyword intent; not a listings/feed platform. |
| Best-fit weekly loop: choose the tool that matches your “week,” not the feature list. | Publish/optimize pages + monitor rankings/links as a steady rhythm. | Research competitors + validate with PPC signals + feed winners into SEO. |
Parameter 9: Content Planning For Local Growth (And Leads You Can Measure)
Here’s the practical difference I see in real workflows: Moz Pro is better when content planning starts with SEO fundamentals (keyword intent, on-page priorities, link signals) and you want to build durable pages you can improve over time. Spyfu is better when content planning starts with competitive reality (what competitors buy, rank for, and repeat), and you want to move fast, especially when paid and organic need to share the same message map.
This matters for content strategy for local businesses because the goal isn’t “publish more.” It’s how to generate local leads with the right page types, then tighten conversion and credibility signals (reviews, proof, UX) until the funnel behaves.
| Pointer | Moz Pro | Spyfu |
| Planning style: build durable SEO pages vs build competitive, message-first pages. | Strong for SEO-led planning using Keyword Explorer + link metrics and long-term page improvements. | Strong for competitor-first planning (keywords, ads, and what’s persisted historically). |
| Local page outcomes: service pages that convert, not just blog posts. | Helps prioritize local landing pages that deserve links + on-page improvements. | Helps align landing pages with what competitors already prove via ads + keywords. |
| Content cadence: evergreen + seasonal content ideas for local businesses. | Better when you’re stacking topical authority and improving pages iteratively. | Better when you’re reacting to competitor moves and testing angles quickly. |
| Creative formats: video marketing for local SEO and supporting pages. | Works when the video supports the same keyword intent and earns links over time. | Works when video angles mirror the ad/keyword messages that already convert. |
| Commerce layer: local product listing optimization as demand capture. | Useful when product/category pages need stronger SEO foundations and link signals. | Useful when competitor intel helps you decide which products/categories deserve a push. |
Parameter 10: AI, Automation & the New SERP Reality
This parameter isn’t about “does the tool have AI?” It’s about whether it helps you change pages faster when search behavior shifts, especially as Google expands AI summaries in the SERP. That Google AI overview seo impact is increasingly visible in publisher complaints and reporting about declining referral clicks, which is why “ranking #1” can feel less valuable than it did a couple of years ago.
In practice, Spyfu leans harder into AI-assisted content improvement via RivalFlow AI (built on Spyfu data) to spot “decay” and suggest what to add/update on existing pages. Moz Pro is less “AI-forward” in its positioning; it’s stronger as a measurement and diagnostics stack (Domain Authority context, Link Explorer, Site Crawl), and teams typically layer AI on top as part of an AI SEO strategy rather than relying on a native assistant.
| Pointer | Moz Pro | Spyfu |
| AI posture: native AI assistant vs AI-as-a-layer on top of classic SEO data. | More “core SEO data + workflows,” with AI often added externally to speed execution. | Pushes AI content iteration via RivalFlow AI to improve existing pages using Spyfu-driven insights. |
| Best fit for AI tools for local SEO: shipping faster, not just researching more. | Strong for audits/links/keyword planning; pair with AI to draft and iterate faster. | Strong when AI prompts help you update pages that already rank but underperform. |
| “Agent-like” workflow: turning insights → tasks → updated pages. | Usually requires your own process (brief template + editor + QA) to behave like SEO AI agents’ ideation workflows | RivalFlow is closer to “agent-like” for content refresh: identify gap → propose edits → publish updates. |
| Practical difference in AI agents vs agentic AIgoogle ai overview seo impact terms. | Moz Pro is not “agentic” by default; it’s a strong signal layer for humans + AI to act on. | Spyfu’s RivalFlow is more “guided action” than a full agent, but it’s closer to “do this next” for content updates. |
| Automation surface area: exports/APIs that help you scale reporting or internal tooling. | Commonly used via exports + integrations; Moz’s ecosystem often starts with MozBar-style browser workflows. | Spyfu highlights plan-based access (and positions its platform around repeatable competitive research + delivery). |
| Reality check: why this matters more now than before. | Use Moz Pro to measure what’s happening (crawl, links, authority context), then use AI to ship fixes fast. | Use Spyfu + RivalFlow to keep existing pages “fresh enough to win clicks” even when SERPs get crowded by AI summaries. |
Parameter 11: Pricing, Trials & Alternatives (Moz Pro vs Spyfu)
Pricing only matters if it supports the weekly work that actually moves leads in a marketing funnel for local businesses, and fits alongside your digital marketing strategies for small businesses and other essential digital marketing tools (analytics, reporting, landing pages, ads).
If you’re researching Moz Pro pricing vs Spyfu pricing (and trying to avoid buying “nice-to-have data”), here’s the practical breakdown.
| Pointer | Moz Pro | Spyfu |
| Headline monthly price | Typical published tiers: Standard $99, Medium $179, Large $299, Premium $599. | Spyfu sells itself as budget-friendly; the purchase flow shows pricing that can start around $29/month (depending on billing). |
| How pricing feels in real use | Costs rise mainly when you need more campaigns, tracking, and full-suite workflows (often why people search “Moz Pro costs” / “cost of Moz Pro”). | Spyfu stays comparatively flat and is often framed as a Spyfu cheap alternative for competitor/PPC intel-heavy workflows. |
| Trial / risk-reversal | Moz Pro is widely listed as having a Moz Pro free trial, but the exact terms can vary depending on the page/offer you land on; verify at checkout. | Spyfu emphasizes a 30-day money-back guarantee (instead of a classic long free trial). |
| API access (“Spyfu API pricing”) | Moz Pro API access isn’t typically positioned as the core buying reason for most SMB teams (Moz’s differentiator is usually metrics + workflows). | Spyfu’s API usage is handled via API credits/charges (they explain how charges are calculated in their help docs). |
| What’s “included” for the money | Strong for link + authority workflows (teams often buy it for Moz metrics like Domain Authority + audits + rank tracking; this shows up a lot in Moz Pro review / Moz Pro reviews). | Strong for competitive PPC/SEO spying and fast competitor digging (common in Spyfu review / Spyfu reviews and “Spyfu competitor analysis” workflows). |
| Free options | You can often do a “trial-first” evaluation, then decide if the suite earns a seat. | People look for Spyfu free SEO tools, but in practice, Spyfu is mostly paywalled beyond limited lookups; many teams treat free Google tools as the real free Spyfu alternative. |
| Alternatives mindset | If you’re mainly doing quick competitor/PPC research, you may not need the full Moz Pro suite (hence “Moz Pro alternatives”). | If you need deeper technical crawling or broader SEO project operations, you’ll often outgrow Spyfu (hence “Spyfu alternatives” / “Spyfu alternative” / “SEO tools like Spyfu”). |
Quick decision rules (so you don’t overthink it)
- Choose Moz Pro if you want a fuller SEO workflow, and you care about link/authority metrics and ongoing auditing (this is usually the “Moz Pro review” sweet spot).
- Choose Spyfu if you want cheaper competitive research, especially PPC keyword/ad insight, and you don’t want a heavier platform (this is why “Spyfu pricing plans” and “Spyfu subscription cost” comparisons come up so often).
- If you need a free Spyfu alternative, start with Google Search Console + Google Keyword Planner for demand signals, then upgrade when you’ve proven the workflow.
How to Choose Fast: 3 Scenarios (Moz Pro vs Spyfu)
1) Solo operator or SMB: you need fast competitor intel (and you don’t want tool overhead)
Pick Spyfu if your week is mostly: “What are competitors ranking/bidding on, and what should we copy or avoid?” Spyfu leans hard into PPC + competitor history, and its plans are built for high-volume research (it advertises unlimited searches and data exports).
This is the cleaner fit when your priority is how to generate local leads, and you’re validating offers with Google Ads for local leads (Spyfu’s ad/keyword history helps you avoid guessing your first tests).
Pricing is also usually the deciding factor—Spyfu publicly lists tiers like Basic/Professional/Team with clear monthly pricing.
2) In-house SEO or content team: you need a steady “track → fix → measure” loop
Pick Moz Pro if you need one place to run the weekly fundamentals: keep a Campaign running, monitor rankings, crawl for technical issues, and lean on Moz’s link metrics to judge authority and risk. In practice, Moz Pro is the steadier choice when you’re doing SEO as a system, not just research bursts.
This is also where your online reputation management workflow matters: if you’re improving pages and earning links, you still need the brand trust layer (reviews, sentiment, and consistency) to convert the traffic you recover.
3) Agency or multi-client: your bottleneck is either reporting speed or opportunity discovery
- Choose Spyfu when your edge is opportunity discovery at scale (competitor keywords, ad history, and “what’s working” patterns you can turn into tasks fast). SpyFu also positions AI add-ons like RivalFlow/SpyGPT for content and competitive workflows, which can support an AI seo strategy when you’re triaging what to update first.
- Choose Moz Pro when your edge is defensible SEO hygiene (crawl discipline, ranking monitoring, and link-quality judgment you can standardize across accounts).
Quick rule: if your marketing funnel for local businesses depends on “research faster than competitors,” Spyfu is usually the quicker win. If it depends on “run clean SEO every week and prove progress,” Moz Pro tends to be easier to operationalize.
Conclusion: Moz Pro vs Spyfu (the practical pick)
If you’re choosing between Moz Pro and Spyfu, the clear decision is this:
- Pick Moz Pro when your weekly work is SEO execution and site health: crawling for technical issues, improving on-page SEO, tracking rankings, and using Moz’s link metrics (like Domain Authority and Spam Score) to guide link strategy. Moz Pro is priced as a tiered SEO suite (plans commonly listed from $49/month Starter and $99/month Standard, with higher tiers like $179/$299).
- Pick Spyfu when your weekly work is competitive intel and PPC/SEO research: finding competitors’ keywords, ad history, and the fastest “what are they doing that’s working?” answers—without paying platform-level pricing. Spyfu positions its plans as starting at $29/month and emphasizes a 30-day money-back guarantee.
The honest “best tool” answer:
- Moz Pro wins when you need stronger auditing + durable SEO workflows.
Spyfu wins when you need cheap, fast competitor research to shape campaigns and content priorities.
Frequently Asked Questions
How much does Moz Pro cost?
How to get Moz Pro for free?
How to get an up-to-date Moz Pro report?
Is Moz Pro worth it?
How to view a website’s traffic on Moz Pro?
What is Spyfu?
How much is Spyfu?
How does Spyfu work?
Which type of company is Spyfu best for?
How much do businesses spend on Spyfu?
