Conductor Website Monitoring vs Lumar (formerly Deepcrawl)
When assessing the two solutions, reviewers found Conductor Website Monitoring easier to use, set up, and administer. Reviewers also preferred doing business with Conductor Website Monitoring overall.
Reviewers felt that Conductor Website Monitoring meets the needs of their business better than Lumar (formerly Deepcrawl).
When comparing quality of ongoing product support, reviewers felt that Conductor Website Monitoring is the preferred option.
For feature updates and roadmaps, our reviewers preferred the direction of Lumar (formerly Deepcrawl) over Conductor Website Monitoring.
Pricing
Entry-Level Pricing
Conductor Website Monitoring
No pricing available
Lumar (formerly Deepcrawl)
No pricing available
Free Trial
Conductor Website Monitoring
Free Trial is available
Lumar (formerly Deepcrawl)
No trial information available
Ratings
Meets Requirements
9.1
92
9.0
77
Ease of Use
9.3
93
8.5
78
Ease of Setup
9.6
58
8.9
37
Ease of Admin
9.3
57
8.9
29
Quality of Support
9.5
87
9.4
70
Has the product been a good partner in doing business?
Hi Brian, thanks for your question!
ContentKing simulates search engines, which means that it monitors websites by continuously crawling them. Thanks to...Read more
Conductor Website Monitoring has no more discussions with answers
With over 3 million reviews, we can provide the specific details that help you make an informed software buying decision for your business. Finding the right product is important, let us help.