Indexification alternative compared on pricing and a 100 percent crawl guarantee that does not cover indexing

What Indexification guarantees, in its own words

The FAQ has a section headed "CRAWLING vs INDEXING" and it is the most honest paragraph we have read on any vendor site in this category. It says: "Noone can give You a guarantee that a page will be indexed, nor We do as well. Everyone giving You a 100% guarantee on the Indexing is simply lying You. Such a guarantee can only be given by the Search Engine itself and noone else."

What it does guarantee is the crawl. In its own framing, submit 1,000 pages and it will make search engine spiders visit all 1,000, and the link shortener it puts in front of every URL is what lets it verify that. It then reports its own observed indexing range at 70 to 95 percent of pages submitted, from its internal tests, and it is careful to call that a measurement rather than a promise.

That distinction is real and it cuts both ways. It means Indexification is not overselling, which is rare here. It also means the thing you are buying is crawl activity, and the risk that Google looks at a crawled page and declines it stays entirely with you. Every vendor in the row above prices the other way round: the miss is free and the vendor carries that risk.

The refunds policy is separate and narrower than the phrase "fully guaranteed" suggests. It offers 7 day money back if the service completely fails to operate or does not contain the features described. It then says explicitly that refunds are not given to people who only wanted to try it out, or who bought by mistake. So the guarantee covers the product working, not your links landing.

How does Indexification get links crawled?

It publishes the mechanism on the home page, in six steps. It generates a shortened URL for each of your backlinks using a 301 redirect and tracks crawler visits on it. It pings each link individually, repeatedly. It creates content pages containing your backlinks on what it calls randomly picked established sites that it owns. It creates RSS feeds on those same sites. It creates XML sitemaps on them. And it adds what it calls secret ingredients that it does not describe.

The FAQ fills in the rest. It says the shortener runs on a wide range of privately registered domains hosted on different IPs, that pinging goes through multiple private and public proxies, and that it will not disclose which sites are in the network, in order to protect its customers and the sites themselves. It describes the whole approach as leaving zero footprints and as completely whitehat and legal.

Read that plainly and it is a network of domains, owned by one operator, that exists to host links pointing at customer URLs. Whether that sits inside or outside Google link spam policies is Google judgment and not ours to declare, but you should make the call knowingly rather than discover the mechanism later. The step worth flagging separately is the 301 shortener: Google documentation confirms Googlebot follows permanent redirects and treats the target as canonical, and Gary Illyes of Google said in 2016 that 30x redirects no longer lose PageRank, so the redirect itself is not the questionable part. The hosting network is.

There is also a housekeeping detail with teeth. The FAQ says all campaigns are purged seven days after they complete, on the reasoning that by then the links have been crawled and whatever Google classed as quality is already indexed. That means the shortened URLs stop resolving and your reporting history goes with them. If you need a record of what was submitted and what happened, export it inside that window.

Where Indexification is genuinely stronger

At very high volume, nothing priced per link can touch it. The account defaults are unlimited campaigns, unlimited URLs per campaign, and 1.5 million links a month, which works out to 50,000 a day. Put that through a credit-based vendor at four cents a link and the same month costs around $60,000. Whatever Indexification charges, it is not that, because no subscription in this category is.

The integration list is the other real advantage and it is specific rather than decorative. It lists verified integrations with Scrapebox, GSA Search Engine Ranker, SEnuke XCr, No Hands SEO, Magic Submitter, Ultimate Demon, Backlink Monitor and around a dozen more, plus pull-based integrations with link building services including Backlinks Genie, Dripable and RankWyz. If your link building already runs through one of those, you paste an API key once and stop thinking about it.

Scheduling is the third. Links can be scheduled up to 30 days ahead, and the FAQ gives the reasoning: pushing a large batch live at once is riskier than spreading exposure over time. Most credit vendors offer some form of drip feed, but few explain why they think it matters.

And it reports dead links. Automated link building produces a lot of URLs that are removed within weeks, and a tool that tells you which of your submitted links now return 404 is doing useful work regardless of what it indexes.

The site has no HTTPS, and that is not a small thing in 2026

We checked this several ways because it seemed unlikely. https://indexification.com and https://www.indexification.com both refuse the connection outright: port 443 is closed, which means there is no expired certificate to renew, there is simply no TLS listener. The apex over plain HTTP issues a 301 to the www host, also over plain HTTP. Every page, including the registration form and the login form, is served unencrypted.

So the username, password and email address you type to find out the price travel across the network in the clear, as does every session cookie afterwards. Chrome has marked plain HTTP pages as Not secure since 2018 and now warns before insecure form submissions. If you reuse passwords anywhere, this is the account to give a unique one.

A few other markers point the same way. The payment FAQ still names Plimus, which rebranded to BlueSnap back in 2013. The footer still carries a Find us on Google Plus link, and Google Plus closed to consumers in April 2019. The site also shares a single sign-on pool with CaptchaTronix, InstantLinkIndexer, TextCaptchaSolver, CatchAllBoxes and InnoCoders, so one account and one password span six services from the same operator, listed as Inno Coders.

None of that means the service is not running. The application responds, the FAQ is coherent, and a product that had been abandoned would not still be answering. It does mean the public site has not been maintained in a long time, and you should weight the homepage counters accordingly: 831,382 users, 186 million links in 24 hours and a 4.9 out of 5 rating from 8,127 reviews are numbers the vendor displays about itself, with no third-party source we could find.

Pages on your own site need official submission, not a link network

If the URLs you are worried about sit on a domain you control, a backlink indexer is the wrong shape of tool and no amount of crawl activity fixes the underlying problem. Google removed the public Add URL form years ago and tied submission to verified ownership, which is exactly the door you already have. Request Indexing in Search Console runs at roughly 10 to 12 URLs a day per property. The Indexing API has a default publish quota of 200 a day per project. Bing IndexNow accepts up to 10,000 URLs in a single post.

Those are the channels Indexing drives. You connect the property, it bulk-submits through the Indexing API and IndexNow, pings the sitemap, then checks every URL against both engines on a schedule and tells you which ones are in, which ones dropped out and how long each took to land.

The part that matters more is what happens to the pages that stay out. A page Google has never fetched and a page Google fetched and declined look identical in a checker and need opposite fixes. Indexing separates them and gives a plain-English reason for the second group, because that is the group where resubmitting is wasted effort. Thin content, a canonical pointing elsewhere, a noindex header nobody remembers adding, or a server that was returning 5xx when Googlebot called: Google own crawl budget documentation is explicit that 5xx and 429 responses make its crawlers slow down, so an availability problem becomes an indexing problem.

How to test Indexification before you commit a budget

Register, get the price, and treat the first month as a measurement rather than a campaign. Submit a batch of 500 links you can identify later, from a single source, and leave everything else alone so the result is attributable.

Then measure the thing the vendor does not guarantee. Export the list on day seven, before the campaign is purged, and check index status yourself with a bulk checker rather than trusting the crawl tracker, because crawl tracking answers a different question. Divide indexed links by links submitted and compare that against the 70 to 95 percent range the FAQ reports.

Do the division that decides it. Take the monthly price, divide by the number of links that actually indexed, and you have a real cost per indexed link. Put that next to the four to five cents a refunding vendor charges, where the misses cost nothing. At high volume Indexification will usually win that comparison on price alone. At a few thousand links a month it usually will not, and you will have found out with one month of spend instead of a year of it.

One last check before you scale anything: look at where the links themselves live. The Indexification FAQ lists the factors it sees hurting index rates, and they are the honest ones, a domain that has been spammed too heavily, slow loading, more than 100 outbound links on the page, and very little text. If your links sit on pages like that, no indexer of any kind is going to change the outcome.