IndexCheckr vs URL Monitor (Cromojo) Pricing Compared

IndexCheckr and URL Monitor are no longer the same kind of product. IndexCheckr sells checks by the credit, from $0.0075 down to $0.0013 each, with no subscription, and it never submits a URL itself. URL Monitor rebranded to Cromojo and now sells three separately priced modules on a $19 to $299 monthly ladder, where the Indexing module does submit to Google and Bing and re-submits pages that drop out. Pick IndexCheckr if you want metered checking across unlimited pages and already have an indexer. Pick Cromojo if you want checking and submission in one bill and can live with its daily submission caps.

Both vendors were read directly from their own sites this month: indexcheckr.com including its pricing section and feature pages, and cromojo.com including its full pricing matrix. We sell neither. We build a tool for pages on sites you own, and the last section says exactly where that line falls.

First, the thing that catches most people out

urlmonitor.com now issues a 301 to cromojo.com. The company published a post explaining the rename, and its reasoning was that the old name boxed the product into one job while the roadmap had grown past it. Everything that used to sit under URL Monitor is still there, but it is now one module inside a wider platform that also sells web analytics with revenue attribution and a separate uptime and performance monitor.

That matters for pricing, because Cromojo's FAQ is explicit that the three modules are billed separately: you pick the ones you need and each scales on its own. So the $19 a month you see on the pricing page is $19 for one module, not $19 for the platform. If you want indexing and page monitoring together at the Starter size, that is two line items.

IndexCheckr vs URL Monitor at a glance

Which is cheaper?

It flips, and it flips hard. Metered checking is cheaper than a subscription at small volumes and much more expensive at large ones, because IndexCheckr's cost grows with every URL you watch while Cromojo's grows only when you add sites.

The table below assumes daily checking for a full month and picks the cheapest IndexCheckr pack whose per-check rate applies at that volume. Credits never expire, so the figure shown is credits consumed rather than the sticker price of the pack.

Read that bottom row twice before you commit to either. At ten thousand pages, IndexCheckr costs roughly eight times what Cromojo's Indexing module costs, and Cromojo also submits. The catch is on the other side of the ledger: Cromojo's published matrix caps daily URL submissions and sets sitemap check frequency per tier, but it does not publish a ceiling on how many URLs it will track the index status of. Ask support for that number in writing before you size a plan around it, because it is the one figure that decides whether the comparison above holds.

IndexCheckr has no such ambiguity. A check costs a credit, you can see exactly what you have spent in its usage report broken down by project and recheck frequency, and nothing runs that you did not schedule. For teams who have been burned by a tool quietly changing what a plan includes, that predictability is worth real money.

Does either one actually submit your URLs?

Only Cromojo. IndexCheckr is direct about this: its own feature copy says you connect it to your favorite indexer tool and submit non-indexed pages from there, and it names the integrations, IndexMeNow, Omega Indexer, SpeedLinks, Links Indexer, Rapid URL Indexer, Sinbyte and Indexzilla. That is a one-click handoff, not a submission. The working setup is two vendors and two bills, and the second bill is the larger of the two at any serious volume, because those indexers charge four to ten cents per link where IndexCheckr charges a fraction of a cent per check.

Cromojo submits to Google and Bing itself, sends a weekly indexing digest, and from the Pro tier up will automatically re-submit pages it sees drop out of the index. For a site that publishes constantly, that auto-resubmit is the single feature most worth paying for here, because de-indexing is usually noticed weeks late.

What Cromojo's tiers are really selling

Line up two numbers from its pricing matrix and something becomes obvious. Daily URL submissions run 25, 300, 600, 1,200 and 2,400 across the five tiers. Google service accounts run 1, 1, 3, 6 and 10.

Divide one by the other and most tiers land on almost exactly 200 submissions per service account. Google documents the default publish quota for the Google Indexing API at 200 requests a day per project, and a service account belongs to a project. So moving up Cromojo's ladder does not buy faster indexing. It buys more of Google's own quota, stacked across more projects, which is a legitimate and sensible way to build the product but not the same thing as speed.

Every vendor in this category is dividing the same metered resource. Google retired the public Add URL form and tied submission to verified ownership, Request Indexing in Search Console runs at roughly 10 to 12 URLs a day per property, and the Indexing API default sits at 200 a day per project. Nobody sells throughput Google does not already meter. What separates tools is what happens to the pages the meter leaves behind.

What changed for existing URL Monitor customers

The product was sold on AppSumo under the old name, and lifetime deal holders have been asking publicly about grandfathering since the rename. If you bought a lifetime tier, get the mapping between your old limits and the new module structure confirmed in writing before you plan around it, because the platform now splits into three separately priced modules and an old single-product entitlement does not map cleanly onto that.

If you are shopping rather than grandfathered, the rename is mostly good news. The index monitoring that made URL Monitor worth buying is still there, the submission side has grown to cover Bing through IndexNow, and the annual prices take roughly 20 percent off. The trade is that you are now buying into a platform with an analytics module priced by pageviews and an overage rate, so read which modules you are actually being quoted for.

Which should an agency pick?

For most agencies, Cromojo, and the deciding factor is rarely price. It is that checking and submitting live in one place with one login, client sites are the unit of scale rather than URL count, and API access arrives at the Business tier alongside per-site team access and workspace branding. If you report coverage to clients monthly, having submission attached to the same dashboard removes a whole step.

IndexCheckr wins in three specific situations. The first is backlink verification, where you are checking pages on domains you do not own and site-count pricing makes no sense at all. The second is a large team, because unlimited members share one credit pool with no per-seat charge, while Cromojo gates team members behind Pro and per-site access behind Business. The third is irregular work: credits never expire, so a quarterly audit costs you nothing in the months between. Our IndexCheckr alternative page covers its full credit ladder, and the URL Monitor alternative page does the same on the other side. If you are weighing a third option, Rapid Index Checker vs IndexCheckr compares the two closest checkers head to head.

The failure mode neither price list mentions

A page can be perfectly indexable and still vanish because your server was unwell when Googlebot called. Google's crawl budget documentation says plainly that 5xx and 429 responses prompt its crawlers to slow down, and that any content returned with a 5xx status code is ignored. A bad hour during a crawl window shows up three weeks later as pages quietly missing from the index, and an index checker will report the symptom without ever naming the cause.

IndexCheckr does not watch for this at all. Cromojo does, through its Monitoring module, but that is a third line item on the same $19 to $299 ladder. If availability is the only gap you need to close, a standalone uptime monitor that checks the site continuously and alerts on the first error response costs less than adding a module you will otherwise not use.

What neither tool does for pages on your own site

Between them these two cover checking well and submission adequately, and both stop at the same wall: telling you why a page Google fetched was left out. A URL Google has never crawled and a URL Google crawled and declined look identical in any checker, and they need opposite fixes. Sending the second one through the Indexing API again changes nothing, because the crawl already happened and the answer was no.

That is the gap Indexing is built for. It connects your verified property, bulk-submits through the Google Indexing API, Bing IndexNow and your XML sitemap, monitors coverage on both engines, and then splits the misses into pages that were never fetched and pages that were fetched and rejected, with a plain-English reason for each: a canonical pointing somewhere else, a noindex header nobody remembers adding, thin content, or a server that was returning errors at the wrong moment. You fix the cause once instead of paying to have the same URL visited again. If you only want to see where a list of pages stands right now, the bulk index checker does that for the whole list in one pass.