The price list looks simple until you count your domains. A Montreal company running an English site for clients abroad and a French one for hiring here is not buying one subscription. It is buying two, and the second decision is harder than the first.
Two service levels, two add-ons sold by the slot, and a monthly figure that multiplies by the number of domains you point at it. Nothing in that structure is complicated. What is complicated is deciding which of your sites deserves which level, and the intuitive answer is wrong often enough to be worth an article.
You are buying a domain-month, not a project
The unit is one domain for one month. AutoSEO is 149 USD against that unit; FullSEO is 500 USD. Add a second domain and the figure doubles, whatever the second domain is — a marketing site, a documentation subdomain treated as its own property, a French sister site with a tenth of the traffic.
That has a consequence people meet late. Structural decisions made years ago for other reasons — a separate .ca, a spun-out product domain, a careers site built in a hurry — are now line items. Before comparing tiers, count what you own and decide what is worth running a campaign against at all.
| Level | Monthly, per domain | Approximate CAD | Twelve months, one domain |
|---|---|---|---|
| AutoSEO | 149 USD | around 200 CAD | 1,788 USD |
| FullSEO | 500 USD | around 680 CAD | 6,000 USD |
| Wikipedia add-on | 10 USD per slot | around 14 CAD per slot | Depends on the block chosen |
| PBN add-on | 1 USD per slot | around 1.40 CAD per slot | Depends on the block chosen |
AutoSEO at 149 USD a month
The lower tier is a campaign that runs whether or not anybody on your side looks at it this month. That is its design goal rather than a compromise, and it is what makes it appropriate for a domain nobody has time to supervise.
AutoSEO — the campaign runs itself
For a domain with existing search history and nobody free to steer it weekly.
- Keywords found and prioritised automatically. The system builds the target list itself and orders it, without waiting for a decision from you.
- Backlinks built without your involvement. Placements are made across the partner network, which spans over 230,000 sites.
- On-site suggestions from the model. Recommended changes to titles, structure and copy, delivered as proposals you apply at your own pace.
- Full analytics and live chat. The complete Search Console and SERP views, plus the assistant, with no reduction against the higher tier.
Worth stating plainly, because it is the point people get wrong: the analytics included at both levels are identical. The eight Search Console screens, the six ranking screens and the generative research are all present at 149 USD. What the higher tier sells is control, not visibility.
The weakness of the automated level is specific. Automatic discovery works from what already exists: your Search Console history and live results for terms you are already near. On a domain with three years of data, that is plenty to work from. On a domain with almost none, there is little to discover, and the automation quietly targets the handful of terms it can see.
FullSEO at 500 USD a month, and the mode switch
The higher tier adds people and adds decisions. Behind it sits a team of SEO specialists, developers and writers, and in front of it sits a set of switches that decide how much of the campaign you personally sign off.
FullSEO — automation with a hand on it
For a domain where the target list, the placements or the copy need judgement.
- Manual keyword selection, with automatic fallback. You choose the targets; if you choose nothing, the automatic route takes over and the month is not lost.
- Manual placement with a domain-rating target. You set the quality threshold links are placed against, rather than accepting whatever the automation selects.
- Human-review mode for on-site changes. Proposed edits wait for a person to approve them before anything is applied to the site.
- A team behind the account. Specialists, developers and writers, which is most of what the extra 351 USD is buying.
The switch is really a staffing question in disguise. It asks whether somebody at your company will reliably spend an hour a month on this, and it is safer to answer honestly than optimistically. A team that intends to review and then does not still gets a campaign, because the automatic path picks up the terms nobody approved.
The reverse mistake costs more. Paying 500 USD and never touching a switch buys the team and the fallback and little else you would not have had at 149. If that is the honest forecast for a domain, the lower tier is the correct purchase.
Wikipedia at 10 USD and PBN at 1 USD
Both extras are priced per slot and bought in fixed blocks, which makes their arithmetic unusually easy to check before you commit to anything.
Wikipedia slots
Blocks of 0, 1, 5 or 10, priced per slot and added to the monthly figure.
- Four block sizes. Zero, one, five or ten slots — nothing between them, so the decision is coarse by design.
- The arithmetic in full. One slot is 10 USD a month, five is 50, ten is 100, on top of the tier you are paying for that domain.
- Small numbers by nature. The largest block is ten, which tells you what kind of instrument this is: selective, not a volume play.
PBN slots
Blocks of 0, 20, 100 or 500, at a dollar each — the cheapest line and the easiest to over-buy.
- Four block sizes, widely spaced. Zero, twenty, one hundred or five hundred slots, with nothing in between.
- The arithmetic in full. Twenty slots is 20 USD a month, one hundred is 100, five hundred is 500 — the price of a whole FullSEO subscription.
- Cheap per unit, not cheap in aggregate. The top block costs the same as moving a domain from the lower tier to the higher one, which is the comparison worth making.
Where the keyword pool comes from, and who empties it
Both tiers work from the same pool, fed from three places. Understanding the mix explains why the automated level behaves so differently on a mature domain than on a new one.
Three sources fill it
Candidates arrive from your own history, from live results, and from terms you supply yourself.
- Search Console: what you already appear for
- Live results: the space around your current positions
- Seed keywords: terms you contribute directly
Three verdicts empty it
Every candidate is handled on its own, rather than as a batch you accept or refuse wholesale.
- Approved and taken into the campaign
- Rejected and taken out of consideration
- Deferred, held for a later decision
The first two sources are observational and the third is not. That distinction matters for a French site or a young product domain, where the history is thin and live results are dominated by sites that have been there longer. Seeds are the only channel through which the campaign learns about a term you have never appeared for.
Which is also why the per-candidate verdict is more useful than it sounds. Bulk approval defeats the purpose. The value sits in the rejections — terms that look plausible, carry volume, and belong to a market you do not sell into.
- Reject rather than defer, where you can. A deferred pile that nobody revisits becomes a permanent backlog and quietly hides the terms you did want.
- Seed the terms your history cannot show. Anything you have never ranked for is invisible to the observational sources and has to be supplied.
- Watch for terms from the wrong French market. Generic French terms often bring volume from France rather than Quebec — plausible on paper, worthless in a sales pipeline.
- Give the queue a named owner. Approval is the one recurring task the automation cannot do for you, and it takes minutes rather than hours.
Two domains, two languages, and the tier you did not expect
Because billing follows domains, a company running separate English and French sites faces a decision a single-language competitor never does. The instinctive move is to put both on the same level: it feels even-handed and it makes the invoice easy to explain.
It is usually the wrong call, because the two sides are not two versions of one problem. They face different competition, carry different volume, and are worth different amounts commercially. Treating them identically means one of them is over-served and the other is under-served, and it is rarely obvious in advance which is which.
Here is the case that surprises people. The English site has years of history, sells to buyers in Los Angeles and London, and sits in a keyword space the automation reads fluently. It does well on the automated tier precisely because there is so much to work from.
The French site has a fifth of the volume, and it carries recruiting and local credibility. It also has almost no history to learn from, competes against French rather than Quebec sites on generic terms, and needs a target list chosen deliberately rather than inferred. That describes a domain wanting manual selection, seeded terms and a quality threshold on placements — the higher tier, on the smaller site.
| Situation on that domain | Reasonable tier | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Years of search history, broad keyword space | AutoSEO | Automatic discovery has plenty to work from and needs no supervision |
| Thin history, terms must be chosen deliberately | FullSEO | Manual selection and seeds do the work the observed data cannot |
| Low volume, high commercial or hiring value | FullSEO | Value per visit, not visit count, is what justifies the spend |
| High volume, low value per visit | AutoSEO | Nothing here needs judgement that costs 351 USD a month |
| Nobody will review anything, on any site | AutoSEO on both | The higher tier's controls go unused and the money is wasted |
The test is not which site is bigger. It is which site would benefit from a decision being made about it every month — and for a lot of Montreal companies, that is the French one, because it is the site where nobody has ever sat down and decided what it should rank for.
Twelve months at a thirty-person studio
Take a Montreal game studio of about thirty-five people. It runs a .com in English carrying the portfolio and the client-facing pages, and a .ca in French carrying recruitment, studio culture and local presence. The English domain has years of data behind it. The French one was built in a week two years ago and has been left alone since.
The plan: both domains start on the automated tier while somebody works out what the French site should even target. From month four the French domain moves up, keeping the English one where it is. A single Wikipedia slot is added from month six, and the smallest PBN block runs on the English domain from month four.
| Period | English .com | French .ca | Add-ons | Quarter total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Months 1–3 | AutoSEO, 149 | AutoSEO, 149 | None | 894 USD |
| Months 4–6 | AutoSEO, 149 | FullSEO, 500 | PBN 20 slots; Wikipedia 1 slot from month 6 | 2,017 USD |
| Months 7–9 | AutoSEO, 149 | FullSEO, 500 | PBN 20 slots; Wikipedia 1 slot | 2,037 USD |
| Months 10–12 | AutoSEO, 149 | FullSEO, 500 | PBN 20 slots; Wikipedia 1 slot | 2,037 USD |
Two things are worth noticing. The expensive line is the smaller site, which looks like an error on a spreadsheet sorted by traffic and is defensible the moment you ask what one good hire is worth. And the add-ons total 250 USD across the year, under four per cent of the spend, which is roughly the weight they deserve.
Run the same plan with both domains on the higher tier and the year comes to 12,250 USD. The difference of 5,265 USD buys manual control on a domain that had years of usable history and did not need it.
Questions that come up before signing
Can we run different tiers on different domains?
Yes — billing is per domain, so each one carries its own level and its own add-ons. That is the flexibility worth using. Matching tiers across an estate is a habit, not a requirement, and it usually reflects how the invoice looks rather than what the sites need.
Do our two language sites count as one domain or two?
If both languages live in directories on one domain, that is one subscription and one tier for both. Two separate domains are two subscriptions. This is worth checking before you restructure anything, because the answer changes the arithmetic considerably in either direction.
How quickly should we expect to see anything?
First measurable movement typically appears at four to eight weeks, usually in impressions and positions rather than enquiries. Judge a campaign over quarters. A domain with little history takes longer than one with years of data, which is why the French site in the example is the patient one.
Should we buy add-ons from the first month?
There is little reason to. Add-ons multiply whatever is already working, so add them once the target list has settled. Starting at zero on both and revisiting in month four costs nothing and avoids paying for placements aimed at terms you later reject.
Can we move a domain between tiers later?
The tier is a monthly setting per domain, which is what makes a staged plan like the one above workable. The practical constraint is not the switch but the review capacity: moving up only pays if somebody is going to use the manual controls the higher level provides.
How long it takes, and which level suits whom
The honest horizon is not four to eight weeks. That is when the instruments start showing movement, not when the phone rings. A twelve-month view is the right unit for a decision of this size, with a review at month three to confirm the target list rather than to judge results that cannot exist yet.
AutoSEO suits
Domains with history, and teams that will not supervise anything monthly.
- An established English site selling abroad
- Secondary or product domains
- A first year with nobody assigned to it
FullSEO suits
Domains where the target list needs choosing and somebody will actually choose it.
- A thin French site carrying recruitment
- A market entry with no search history
- Sites where copy must be reviewed before release
If you take one thing from the price list, take this: the number of domains decides the total, and the tier decides only how it is split. Count the domains first, cut the ones nobody would defend, and only then argue about levels. Comparing the two service levels side by side is the easy part of this exercise.
The rest is a question about your own capacity. Look at the last six months and count how often somebody reviewed anything on the smaller site. If the answer is zero, the higher tier there is aspirational — and if nobody was ever asked to, that is a different problem and a cheaper one to fix. More on how we approach that in the work we take on and across the blog.
To price your own estate rather than a studio in an example, list your domains, decide which two you would defend in front of a finance director, and set them up in a panel with your own domains attached. Start both on the automated level, spend month one on the keyword approval queue instead of on the tier decision, and move the site that needs judgement upward in month four — by which point you will know which one that is, rather than guessing from a traffic report.
