Top 9 Inlinks Alternatives | Features, Pricing & Review

InLinks founded by Dixon Jones of Majestic fame has become a popular tool in the SEO community for suggesting and implementing internal linking structures. With tiered pricing based on the number of URLs and the promise of traffic improvements (users reported up to 20% increase on previously under-linked sites), InLinks has positioned itself as a leader in the internal linking space.

In a comprehensive study conducted by InLinks, data from 5,112 websites across various industries revealed that a staggering 82% of internal linking opportunities were missed before optimization. Its reliance on JavaScript snippets for automated linking, URL-based pricing, and mixed performance on sites with strong existing links has been disliked and many SEO professionals are now looking for InLinks alternatives. 

This article dives deep into the best InLinks alternatives in 2025, providing actionable insights and comparisons to help you find the perfect fit for your website’s internal linking strategy.

Key reasons to look for InLink alternatives

Despite InLinks’ strong features for building internal linking structures, several users find its impact varies depending on the site’s existing link architecture. Sites with extensive internal linking might see no measurable benefit, and the tool’s reliance on a JavaScript snippet for automation can be limiting—especially for users seeking a purely analysis-based approach without altering site code.

Additionally, tiered pricing by URL count can feel restrictive, particularly for larger websites where covering all URLs would be cost-prohibitive. This is why many users are exploring InLinks alternatives that offer either more robust analytical features, CMS-agnostic support, or manual link management while still providing actionable insights.

Criteria for choosing right InLink alternatives

• When selecting an alternative to InLinks, users should consider the following criteria drawn from real-world feedback:
• Data-Driven Analysis: Choose a tool that offers comprehensive internal link analysis—like graphs, link scores, and crawl diagrams—without enforcing automated linking if manual control is preferred.
• CMS Flexibility: Ensure the tool supports both WordPress and non-WordPress CMSs or is fully platform-agnostic.
• Transparent Pricing: Look for plans that are affordable and scale with your site’s needs, avoiding hidden fees or excessive per-URL pricing.
• Customization: The ability to manually control and analyze link placements is crucial, especially if you want to avoid the tool making changes on your behalf.
• Performance Tracking: Ideally, pick a tool that integrates with your analytics setup or provides measurable traffic and SEO impact.
• Support & Training: Access to solid documentation, demos, or training—especially if using more advanced features like custom scripts or diagrams.

InLink Overview

Known for:

InLinks is a popular internal linking tool developed by Dixon Jones (known for his work with Majestic). It specializes in analyzing a website’s content to recommend relevant internal links that improve SEO.

Key Features:

• Contextual link suggestions based on semantic analysis
• Automated linking using a JavaScript snippet
• URL-based pricing tiers for scalability
• Integration with supported CMSs
• Topic cluster creation and linking strategy support

Best for:

• Medium-sized websites needing a structured internal linking strategy
• Websites with little or no pre-existing internal linking
• Users who value automation and topic clustering features

Pricing:

Pricing is based on the number of URLs per month, with tiers available depending on the site’s size and complexity. Some users express confusion about whether to pay for all URLs on the site or only a subset.

Customer reviews:

• Users on under-linked websites have reported up to a 20% increase in traffic.
• Mixed results on sites with strong pre-existing internal linking, where some users saw no significant impact.
• Users appreciate the brand trust and ease of integration.
• Some find the reliance on JavaScript snippets or manual linking steps a bit tedious.

Rating:

G2 – 3.8/5

USP (Unique Selling Proposition):

Semantic SEO and internal linking automation powered by NLP (Natural Language Processing).
Inlinks differentiates itself through entity-based SEO optimization, leveraging Google’s NLP API to analyze content topics and build internal links around entities instead of just keywords.

Primary Use Case:

Automated internal linking and on-page SEO optimization based on semantic relevance.
It is best suited for SEOs and content marketers managing large websites who want to:

• Automatically create contextual internal links
• Optimize content using entity-based content briefs
• Enhance topical authority through structured interlinking and schema integration

Pros:

• Provides solid link suggestions, especially on sites with weak existing internal linking.
• Some users saw up to a 20% increase in traffic after implementing suggestions.
• Developed by a reputable figure in the SEO community (Dixon Jones).
• Tiered pricing allows for scalability.
• Offers both automated linking (via JS snippet) and manual control.

Cons:

• Mixed effectiveness on websites with strong existing internal linking.
• Requires a JavaScript snippet for full automation, which might not suit all users.
• Pricing is URL-based, which can get expensive for large or complex sites.
• Some confusion over whether all URLs must be included in a paid tier.
• Lacks CMS-agnostic flexibility unless JS snippet is used; might not fully integrate with some platforms.

Top 9 List of Inlinks alternatives

Here’s a list of alternative tools, catering to different needs:

1. Screaming Frog – Excellent for crawl-based link analysis, force-directed diagrams, and exporting link data; strong on link scores and metrics.
   
2. Ahrefs – Great for broken link analysis, general link auditing, and integration with virtual assistants via Upwork.
   
3. LinkStorm – A platform-agnostic tool that finds relevant link opportunities while giving full manual control over links.
   
4. Linkboss – Offers silo building, topic clustering, and bulk interlinking; currently WordPress only but expanding to other CMSs in 2025.
   
5. LinkVector – Another solid alternative offering flexibility and comprehensive link management.
   
6. Link Whisper – Provides basic link suggestions and some automation features; limited but user-friendly.
   
7. Custom Scripts & Python – For technical users who prefer DIY solutions using custom crawlers or analysis scripts via Xpath, Google Sheets, or Google Colab.

8. CrawlSpider – Ideal if you need a thorough audit of your website’s internal linking, CrawlSpider crawls your site to reveal link structure and gaps, helping you plan better link placement manually.

9. Linksy – Perfect for users wanting to automate and streamline internal linking, Linksy provides smart, context-aware link suggestions and handles link placement to save time.

Screaming Frog Overview

Known for:

Screaming Frog SEO Spider is renowned for its robust website crawling capabilities, enabling in-depth technical SEO audits. It’s a staple tool among SEO professionals for identifying on-site issues such as broken links, duplicate content, and metadata problems.

Key Features:

• Comprehensive Crawling: Efficiently crawls websites to uncover SEO issues like broken links, duplicate content, and missing metadata.
  
• Custom Extraction: Allows users to extract specific data using CSS Path, XPath, or regex.
  
• JavaScript Rendering: Crawls JavaScript-heavy websites to ensure all content is analyzed.
  
• Integration with SEO Tools: Seamlessly integrates with Google Analytics, Search Console, and PageSpeed Insights for enriched data analysis.
  
• Structured Data Analysis: Audits structured data implementations to ensure compliance with best practices.
  
• Sitemap Generation: Creates XML sitemaps and can debug existing ones.
  
• Internal Link Optimization: Utilizes a Link Score algorithm to assess and improve internal linking structures
  

Pros:

• Extensive Data Analysis: Provides detailed insights into various SEO elements, aiding comprehensive audits.
  
• Customizable Crawls: Users can tailor crawls to specific needs, focusing on particular sections or elements of a website.
  
• Regular Updates: Consistently updated with new features and improvements.
  
• Affordable Pricing: Offers a free version with substantial features and a reasonably priced paid version.
  
• High User Ratings: Receives positive reviews for its functionality and value.
  

Cons:

• Steep Learning Curve: May be overwhelming for beginners due to its extensive features and technical nature.
  
• Resource-Intensive: Crawling large websites can be demanding on system resources.
  
• Desktop Application: Requires local installation, which may not be ideal for all users.
  
• Limited Keyword Tracking: Lacks built-in keyword rank tracking and backlink analysis, necessitating additional tools for comprehensive SEO analysis.

Best for:

SEO professionals and digital marketers seeking an in-depth, technical analysis of websites. It’s particularly beneficial for medium to large websites where comprehensive audits are essential.

Pricing & Customer Reviews:

• Free Version: Allows crawling of up to 500 URLs, suitable for small websites or initial evaluations.
  
• Paid Version: Priced at $259 per year per license, offering unlimited crawling and advanced features. Bulk discounts are available for multiple licenses. 

Customer Reviews:

• G2: 4.6 out of 5
  
• Capterra: 4.8 out of 5
  
• Software Advice: 4.9 out of 5
  Users praise Screaming Frog for its comprehensive data analysis, customizable features, and value for money. However, some note the steep learning curve and resource demands as potential drawbacks.

Screaming Frog vs. InLinks

While both Screaming Frog and InLinks aim to enhance a website’s SEO performance, they cater to different needs and user preferences.

• Functionality: Screaming Frog offers a deep, technical analysis of websites, providing granular data on various SEO elements. In contrast, InLinks focuses on semantic analysis and automating internal linking strategies.
  
• User Control: Screaming Frog provides users with complete control over the analysis and implementation of SEO strategies. InLinks automates many processes, which may be beneficial for users seeking efficiency but less ideal for those desiring granular control.
  
• Ease of Use: InLinks is generally more user-friendly, catering to users who prefer automated solutions. Screaming Frog, while powerful, has a steeper learning curve, making it more suitable for experienced SEO professionals.
  
• Integration: Screaming Frog integrates with various SEO tools like Google Analytics and PageSpeed Insights, providing a holistic view of website performance. InLinks primarily focuses on internal linking and content optimization
  
• Pricing: Screaming Frog offers a free version with substantial features and a one-time annual fee for the paid version, making it cost-effective for many users. InLinks operates on a subscription model, which may become costly over time, especially for larger websites.

In summary, Screaming Frog is ideal for users seeking a comprehensive, hands-on approach to technical SEO analysis, while InLinks suits those looking for automated internal linking solutions with less emphasis on technical details.

Ahrefs Overview

Known for:

Ahrefs is a leading SEO toolset renowned for its robust backlink analysis, comprehensive keyword research, and detailed site auditing capabilities. It’s trusted by major brands like Shopify, eBay, LinkedIn, Uber, Adobe, Zoom, and Facebook, and is widely used by SEO professionals worldwide.

Key Features:

• Site Explorer: Provides an in-depth look at a website’s backlink profile and organic search traffic.
  
• Keywords Explorer: Offers keyword suggestions and metrics to aid in content strategy.
  
• Site Audit: Identifies technical SEO issues and provides actionable recommendations.
  
• Rank Tracker: Monitors keyword rankings over time across different locations.
  
• Content Explorer: Helps discover high-performing content and link-building opportunities.
  
• Traffic Potential Metric: Estimates the potential traffic for keywords, aiding in prioritization.

Pros:

• Comprehensive Data: Access to extensive backlink and keyword databases.
  
• User-Friendly Interface: Intuitive design with a relatively gentle learning curve.
  
• Versatility: Suitable for various SEO tasks, from technical audits to content strategy.
  
• Regular Updates: Continuous improvements and feature additions.
  
• Multi-Language Support: Interface available in multiple languages.

Cons:

• Pricing: Higher cost compared to some competitors, with entry-level plans having limited features.
  
• No Free Trial: Potential users cannot test the platform before committing.
  
• Limited User Seats: Basic plans include only one user account, with additional seats requiring extra payment.
  
• No Mobile App: Lacks a dedicated mobile application for on-the-go access.

Best for:

SEO professionals, digital marketing agencies, and businesses seeking a comprehensive tool for in-depth SEO analysis, competitor research, and content strategy development.

Pricing & Customer Reviews:

• Pricing: Plans start at around $99/month for the Lite plan, with more advanced features available in higher-tier plans.
  
• Customer Reviews:
  
  • Capterra: 4.7/5
    
  • G2: 4.5/5
    
  • TrustRadius: 9.2/10

Users praise Ahrefs for its depth of data, ease of use, and effectiveness in improving SEO strategies. However, some express concerns about the pricing structure and the lack of a free trial.

Ahrefs vs. InLinks

Both Ahrefs and InLinks are valuable tools in the SEO landscape, but they serve different primary functions and cater to varying user needs.

• Functionality: Ahrefs offers a comprehensive suite for SEO analysis, including backlink profiling, keyword research, and site audits. In contrast, InLinks focuses specifically on internal linking strategies and semantic SEO.
  
• User Control: Ahrefs provides users with detailed data and insights, allowing for manual strategy development. InLinks automates internal linking suggestions based on semantic analysis, which may be preferable for users seeking automated solutions.
  
• Ease of Use: Both platforms are user-friendly, but Ahrefs may require a more in-depth understanding of SEO concepts to fully leverage its features.
  
• Integration: Ahrefs integrates with various SEO tools and services, offering a holistic view of website performance. InLinks primarily integrates with supported CMSs and relies on a JavaScript snippet for full functionality.
  
• Pricing: Ahrefs operates on a subscription model with tiered pricing based on features and usage limits. InLinks’ pricing is based on the number of URLs per month, which can become costly for larger sites.

In summary, Ahrefs is ideal for users seeking a comprehensive SEO tool with extensive data and analysis capabilities, while InLinks is better suited for those focusing on internal linking and semantic SEO strategies.

LinkStorm Overview

Known for:

LinkStorm is known for its advanced internal linking automation platform that helps website owners identify and implement relevant internal links to improve SEO and user experience. Unlike some solutions that rely on a single CMS, LinkStorm is platform-agnostic, making it a good choice for both WordPress and non-WordPress websites.

Key Features:

• Automated Link Suggestions: Uses intelligent algorithms to suggest contextually relevant internal link opportunities across your site.
  
• Link Control: Allows users to review, approve, and edit suggested links before implementing them, giving more control than purely automated solutions.
  
• Platform Agnostic: Works on multiple CMS platforms, including custom setups, making it suitable for diverse tech stacks.
  
• Bulk Link Management: Facilitates adding, editing, and removing links in bulk for larger websites.
  
• Link Reports: Offers analytics on link performance, such as click-through rates and impact on user engagement.
  
• Silo and Topic Clusters: Supports creation of logical link structures (silos) and topical clusters to strengthen site architecture and relevance.

Pros:

• Ease of Use: User-friendly interface with straightforward setup, even for non-technical users.
  
• Flexibility: Works with different CMS platforms, not limited to WordPress.
  
• Full Control: Lets users manually review and approve links, balancing automation with editorial oversight.
  
• Advanced Link Strategies: Supports SEO best practices like siloing and topic clusters, which can enhance search engine visibility.

Cons:

• No Direct Editing in HTML: While it suggests links and offers bulk management, users often need to apply changes via their CMS or code editor.
  
• May Require Technical Setup: Initial configuration might require some technical knowledge, especially for custom CMS integrations.
  
• Less Emphasis on External Data: Primarily focuses on internal link structure and may lack broader SEO analytics compared to tools like Ahrefs.

Best for:

Medium to large websites seeking to enhance their internal linking structure across multiple CMS platforms, especially where editorial control over links is preferred.

Pricing & Customer Reviews:

• Pricing: Typically offers flexible subscription plans based on website size and number of pages/URLs. Some users mention that while it’s competitively priced, costs can add up for very large sites.
  
• Customer Reviews:
  
  • G2: 4.5/5
    
  • TrustRadius: 9.0/10
    
  • Capterra: 4.6/5
    Users appreciate its platform flexibility, ease of use, and the ability to approve links before implementation. Some mention that while setup is generally straightforward, integration on custom CMSs may need additional support.

LinkStorm vs. InLinks

While both LinkStorm and InLinks focus on internal linking, they differ in approach and strengths:

• Functionality: LinkStorm prioritizes user control and multi-CMS support, offering advanced features like silo and topic clustering. InLinks, on the other hand, heavily leverages semantic analysis to suggest links based on entity relationships and NLP, which can be a plus for semantic SEO.
  
• User Control: LinkStorm’s manual approval of suggested links is a strong point for editors and SEOs who want final say before changes are made. InLinks can automate link placement (if you include their JavaScript snippet), which saves time but may require trust in its algorithm.
  
• Ease of Use: Both are considered user-friendly, but LinkStorm’s broader CMS support makes it more flexible for non-WordPress users.
  
• Integration: LinkStorm supports multiple CMSs out of the box, while InLinks often depends on CMS plugins or requires the JavaScript snippet for full functionality.
  
• Pricing: Both operate on a subscription model, typically based on website size or number of URLs. Some users find LinkStorm to be more cost-effective for complex sites with lots of content.

In summary, LinkStorm is an excellent choice for users seeking platform flexibility, editorial control, and advanced internal linking strategies, while InLinks may suit those focused on semantic SEO and who prefer a more automated approach.

LinkBoss Overview

Known for:

LinkBoss is a powerful internal linking automation tool primarily known for creating robust site structures through siloing, topic clustering, and bulk interlinking. Although it’s currently limited to WordPress sites, it’s gaining attention for its comprehensive features and lasting links that remain even after subscription ends.

Key Features:

• Silo Structure: Automates the creation of silos to strengthen topic relevance and internal hierarchy.
  
• Topic Clusters: Automatically creates contextual link clusters that boost topical authority.
  
• Bulk Interlinking: Quickly inserts multiple internal links across a site to improve user navigation and SEO.
  
• Permanent Links: Unlike some tools, LinkBoss leaves interlinks intact even if the subscription is canceled.
  
• Intuitive Dashboard: Simple interface to manage and review linking campaigns efficiently.

Pros:

• Advanced Automation: Offers sophisticated internal linking automation that aligns with modern SEO practices.
  
• Permanent Links: Ensures link longevity, which is especially helpful for maintaining site structure consistency.
  
• User-Friendly: Simple setup and easy management of link campaigns.
  
• Silo & Cluster Support: Goes beyond basic link suggestions to create semantically rich site structures.

Cons:

• Limited to WordPress: Currently does not support non-WordPress platforms, though expansion is planned for 2025.
  
• Basic Reporting: Reporting capabilities are less detailed compared to advanced SEO tools like Ahrefs.
  
• Niche Tool: Focused solely on internal linking—doesn’t provide comprehensive SEO features (like keyword research or site audits).

Best for:

WordPress site owners and content-driven websites looking to automate their internal linking process while maintaining control and SEO best practices.

Pricing & Customer Reviews:

• Pricing: Subscription-based pricing, typically considered competitive for the WordPress-specific market. The cost varies based on the number of URLs and features needed.
  
• Customer Reviews:
  
  • G2: 4.4/5
    
  • Capterra: 4.5/5
    
  • TrustRadius: 8.9/10
    Users appreciate LinkBoss’s silo and topic cluster features, as well as the permanent links. However, some users have expressed a desire for expanded CMS support beyond WordPress.

LinkBoss vs. InLinks

LinkBoss and InLinks cater to internal linking but differ in focus and technical implementation:

• Platform Support: LinkBoss is currently exclusive to WordPress, while InLinks is more versatile with platform-agnostic support via its JavaScript snippet.
  
• Feature Focus: LinkBoss is tailored for advanced internal linking automation—siloing, topic clustering, and bulk linking—while InLinks places emphasis on semantic SEO and entity-based linking.
  
• Link Permanence: LinkBoss’s permanent links feature is unique, whereas InLinks typically relies on dynamic link placement (removed if the subscription ends and the JavaScript snippet is no longer active).
  
• Ease of Use: Both are easy to set up, but LinkBoss’s limited scope makes it faster to deploy for WordPress users. InLinks requires more configuration to fully utilize its semantic analysis and entity linking features.
  
• Pricing & Value: Both tools use subscription models, with LinkBoss considered more cost-effective for WordPress-centric sites that only need internal linking improvements.

In summary, LinkBoss is a robust choice for WordPress sites that want to create a strong internal linking structure with minimal manual effort. InLinks, with its semantic SEO capabilities, is better suited for broader internal linking and topical optimization across various platforms.

LinkVector Overview

Known for:

LinkVector is known for leveraging AI-powered technology to provide intelligent internal linking suggestions that improve website structure, topical relevance, and SEO performance. It is appreciated for its ability to analyze content context and recommend semantically relevant internal links across multiple CMS platforms.

Key Features:

• AI-Driven Link Suggestions: Uses advanced natural language processing (NLP) and AI to analyze site content and generate relevant internal linking opportunities.
  
• Link Opportunity Identification: Detects weak or missing internal links to strengthen site navigation and SEO.
  
• Flexible Link Placement: Supports both automatic link insertion and manual approval workflows.
  
• CMS Agnostic: Compatible with a wide range of CMS platforms beyond just WordPress.
  
• Integration-Friendly: Can be used alongside popular SEO tools for enhanced link strategy.
  
• User-Friendly Interface: Simplifies management of internal links with clear dashboards and actionable insights.

Pros:

• Contextually Relevant Links: AI ensures internal links are topically appropriate and improve user experience.
  
• Automation & Control: Offers a balance between automated suggestions and manual link management.
  
• Wide Compatibility: Works across various CMSs, suitable for diverse website environments.
  
• SEO Enhancement: Helps boost site architecture and topical authority effectively.
  
• Ease of Use: Clear UI and actionable recommendations make it accessible to SEO professionals.

Cons:

• Newer Entrant: As a relatively newer tool, some advanced features and integrations may still be developing.
  
• Learning Curve: Some users may require time to fully understand and leverage AI-driven suggestions.
  
• Limited Advanced Reporting: Reporting capabilities might be more basic compared to mature SEO platforms.
  
• Pricing Considerations: Pricing can be a concern for very large sites or extensive usage.

Best for:

SEO teams and website owners looking for AI-powered, flexible internal linking solutions that work across multiple CMSs and want a mix of automation with manual oversight.

Pricing & Customer Reviews:

• Pricing: Subscription-based, often tiered according to the number of URLs or link suggestions processed monthly. Pricing is competitive within the AI-internal linking niche but can increase for larger sites.
  
• Customer Reviews:
  
  • G2: Approximately 4.3/5 stars, users highlight the accuracy of link suggestions and ease of use.
    
  • Capterra: Around 4.2/5 stars, praised for improving site navigation and SEO but with some requests for deeper analytics.
    
  • TrustRadius: Positive reviews for interface simplicity and recommendation quality, with some users noting the tool is evolving.

LinkVector vs. InLinks

Both LinkVector and InLinks aim to improve internal linking but differ in their approach and feature sets:

• Technology: Both use AI and NLP for semantic link suggestions, but LinkVector emphasizes a balance between automation and manual control, whereas InLinks focuses heavily on entity-based linking and semantic SEO.
  
• Platform Compatibility: LinkVector is CMS agnostic and integrates smoothly with many platforms, while InLinks also supports multiple CMSs through a JavaScript snippet.
  
• Automation: LinkVector offers flexible automation with manual approval options; InLinks automates link insertion primarily via a JavaScript snippet but also allows manual input.
  
• Pricing Models: Both price based on the number of URLs or monthly usage, with InLinks sometimes being pricier for large sites.
  
• SEO Focus: InLinks integrates entity recognition to boost semantic relevance, whereas LinkVector’s AI centers more broadly on content context and link opportunity discovery.
  
• User Experience: Both tools have user-friendly dashboards, but LinkVector users sometimes report a learning curve adapting to AI-driven suggestions.

Summary: LinkVector is ideal for users seeking a flexible AI-powered internal linking tool that balances automation and manual control across various CMS platforms. InLinks suits users prioritizing semantic SEO with entity-driven internal linking and automated JavaScript-based link insertion. The choice depends on specific CMS needs, SEO strategy focus, and desired control over the linking process.

Link Whisper Overview

Known for:

Link Whisper is widely recognized as a user-friendly WordPress plugin designed to simplify and speed up the process of internal link building. It’s known for providing smart link suggestions directly within the WordPress dashboard, helping site owners and SEO professionals improve internal linking without manual guesswork.

Key Features

• Automatic Link Suggestions: Suggests relevant internal links while you write or edit content.
  
• Link Reporting: Provides detailed reports on internal linking status, including orphaned pages and link counts.
  
• Bulk Link Insertion: Allows users to insert multiple internal links quickly across the website.
  
• Anchor Text Recommendations: Suggests optimized anchor texts for internal links.
  
• Link Monitoring: Tracks internal link health and alerts users to broken or missing links.
  
• WordPress Integration: Seamless plugin integration with the WordPress CMS.

Pros:

• Ease of Use: Intuitive interface that integrates well with WordPress content editor.
  
• Time-Saving: Automates internal link suggestions and placements to reduce manual effort.
  
• Improves SEO: Helps enhance site structure and user navigation through better internal linking.
  
• Affordable: Competitive pricing suitable for small to medium WordPress websites.
  
• Detailed Reporting: Gives insights into link distribution and opportunities.

Cons:

• WordPress-Only: Limited to WordPress sites, not suitable for other CMS platforms.
  
• Basic Automation: Automation is limited to link suggestions; no full link-building automation.
  
• Limited Semantic SEO: Does not provide advanced semantic or entity-based linking features.
  
• Reporting Limitations: Reporting and analytics features are somewhat basic compared to all-in-one SEO suites.

Best for:

WordPress website owners, bloggers, and SEO professionals looking for an affordable, easy-to-use plugin to manage and improve internal linking without extensive manual work.

Pricing & Customer Reviews:

• Pricing: Subscription-based plans starting with affordable monthly or yearly fees, scaling with the number of websites.
  
• Customer Reviews:
  
  • G2: Approximately 4.6/5 stars, praised for ease of use and effective link suggestions.
    
  • Capterra: Around 4.5/5 stars, users appreciate time savings but note it’s limited to WordPress.
    
  • TrustRadius: Positive feedback for user-friendly UI and helpful reporting, some desire more advanced SEO features.

Link Whisper vs. InLinks

Link Whisper and InLinks both facilitate internal linking but serve somewhat different user needs:

• Platform Focus: Link Whisper is strictly a WordPress plugin, whereas InLinks works across multiple CMSs via JavaScript or plugins.
  
• Automation Level: Link Whisper primarily provides link suggestions and semi-automates insertion, while InLinks offers deeper semantic SEO-driven automation with entity recognition.
  
• Semantic SEO: InLinks integrates advanced semantic and entity-based linking; Link Whisper focuses more on straightforward internal link building.
  
• Pricing: Link Whisper is generally more affordable, especially for smaller WordPress sites, compared to InLinks’ tiered pricing model based on URL counts.
  
• User Control: Both tools provide manual override options; Link Whisper is simpler and more streamlined for WordPress users.

Summary: Link Whisper is ideal for WordPress users who want an easy, affordable solution to improve internal linking with smart suggestions and basic automation. InLinks is better suited for those looking for more sophisticated semantic SEO features and cross-platform flexibility.

Custom Scripts and Python for Internal Linking

Known for:

Custom scripts, especially using Python, are known for providing complete flexibility and control over internal link analysis and management. SEO professionals and developers use Python scripts to crawl websites, analyze existing internal links, generate link graphs, and identify linking opportunities tailored to their specific needs.

Key Features:

• Website Crawling: Custom crawlers built with libraries like Scrapy or BeautifulSoup to extract internal link data.
  
• Link Graph Visualization: Scripts can generate diagrams or graphs (using libraries like NetworkX or Graphviz) to visualize the internal linking structure.
  
• Data Extraction & Analysis: Extracts detailed data such as in-content links, link attributes, and anchor texts.
  
• Automation Potential: Scripts can be scheduled to run regularly to monitor link changes and new linking opportunities.
  
• Integration: Can integrate with Google Sheets, Excel, or databases for deeper analysis and reporting.
  
• Custom Metrics: Ability to calculate personalized metrics like link score, link depth, or orphan page detection.

Pros:

• Highly Customizable: Tailored exactly to the specific website’s structure and SEO goals.
  
• No Vendor Lock-In: Complete control without dependency on third-party tools or subscriptions.
  
• Cost-Effective: Mostly free except for development time and hosting resources.
  
• Scalable: Can be adapted to handle sites of any size.
  
• Data Transparency: Full access to raw data and algorithms used for link analysis.

Cons:

• Requires Technical Skill: Needs proficiency in Python programming and SEO concepts.
  
• Time-Consuming: Development and maintenance of scripts require ongoing effort.
  
• No Built-In UI: Lacks user-friendly dashboards and reports unless built separately.
  
• Manual Link Placement: Scripts identify opportunities but don’t automate link insertion into CMS.
  
• No Semantic Linking: Usually lacks advanced AI-driven semantic or entity-based linking features unless custom-coded.

Best for:

SEO experts, developers, or teams comfortable with coding who want a highly tailored, transparent internal linking analysis solution for medium to large websites or specialized use cases.

Pricing & Customer Reviews:

• Pricing: Free to use open-source libraries; cost involves developer time and hosting.
  
• Customer Feedback: Valued by technically skilled users for flexibility and control; less suitable for non-technical users.

Custom Scripts and Python vs. InLinks

• Flexibility: Custom scripts offer unmatched flexibility, whereas InLinks provides a ready-made, user-friendly platform with semantic SEO features.
  
• Automation: InLinks automates semantic internal link building, while custom scripts focus on analysis and reporting with no direct CMS integration for link insertion.
  
• Ease of Use: InLinks is more accessible to non-technical users; custom scripts require programming expertise.
  
• Semantic SEO: InLinks uses entity recognition to enhance semantic relevance; custom scripts typically need additional AI components to replicate this.
  
• Cost: Custom scripts are cheaper monetarily but cost more in terms of time and skills compared to subscription-based InLinks.

Summary: Custom scripts and Python are ideal for users seeking maximum control and customization in internal linking analysis and strategy, especially those with programming expertise. InLinks suits users who want an out-of-the-box, semantic SEO-focused internal linking tool with automation and ease of use.

CrawlSpider Overview

Known for:

CrawlSpider is known as a robust website crawling and internal link analysis tool that helps SEO professionals audit and visualize internal link structures to identify gaps and optimization opportunities.

Key features:

• Comprehensive crawling of website pages with internal link mapping.
  
• Visual site structure diagrams showing link relationships.
  
• Identification of orphan pages and internal linking gaps.
  
• Exportable reports for detailed manual analysis.
  
• Integration capabilities with SEO tools for further insights.
  
• Focus on in-content link extraction, excluding navigation or footer links if needed.

Pros:

• Provides deep insight into internal link architecture with clear visualizations.
  
• Helps detect weak or missing internal links, orphan pages, and broken links.
  
• Data-driven approach ideal for manual optimization strategies.
  
• Can handle medium to large websites effectively.
  
• Free version available with limitations (depending on crawling scope).

Cons:

• Does not automate link building; manual implementation required.
  
• Lacks features for semantic or AI-driven link suggestions.
  
• No direct link placement or anchor text management.
  
• Steeper learning curve for users unfamiliar with site crawling tools.
  
• Limited CMS integration; mainly an analysis tool.

Best for:

SEO specialists, consultants, and site owners who want precise control over internal link optimization and prefer to plan link structures manually based on detailed site data.

Pricing & Customer reviews:

CrawlSpider pricing varies depending on usage and site size, with free tiers for small sites and paid plans for larger crawls. According to G2 and other review platforms, users appreciate its thorough crawl reports and visual link maps but note the lack of automation and manual effort needed to act on insights. Overall rating hovers around 4.0/5, with praise for data accuracy and suggestions to improve user interface for beginners.

CrawlSpider vs Inlinks: Summary

CrawlSpider and Inlinks cater to different internal linking needs despite some overlap. CrawlSpider excels at providing detailed, data-driven audits of your website’s internal link structure with excellent visualization tools, making it ideal for manual link optimization strategies. In contrast, Inlinks offers automation through semantic link suggestions and schema markup integration, streamlining link placement but with higher costs and some limitations around link permanence and manual control. While CrawlSpider requires hands-on work to implement link changes, it is CMS-agnostic and cost-effective for users who prefer in-depth analysis over automation. Inlinks suits users looking for a more automated, AI-driven solution but may feel restrictive or pricey for those managing multiple medium-sized non-WordPress sites. Choosing between them depends largely on your preference for automation versus manual precision and your CMS environment.

Linksy Overview

Known for:

Linksy is recognized as an automated internal linking tool designed to improve website SEO by generating contextually relevant internal links using semantic analysis, helping websites enhance link equity distribution efficiently.

Key features:

• AI-driven semantic analysis to suggest relevant internal links.
  
• Automated link placement with options for manual review and editing.
  
• Support for various CMS platforms beyond WordPress, offering broader compatibility.
  
• Bulk internal linking and topic cluster creation capabilities.
  
• User-friendly dashboard with actionable insights on link opportunities.
  
• Integration with SEO tools and tracking of link performance over time.

Pros:

• Strong automation reduces time spent on internal linking tasks.
  
• Provides semantically relevant link suggestions that improve SEO context.
  
• Compatible with multiple CMS environments, not limited to WordPress.
  
• Allows manual control for editing anchor texts and link placements.
  
• Supports bulk linking and advanced topic silo structures.
  
• Positive user feedback on improving site rankings and user navigation.

Cons:

• Newer in the market, so smaller user base compared to some established tools.
  
• Pricing details less transparent; may require custom plans for larger sites.
  
• Some users report occasional over-automation requiring manual adjustments.
  
• Feature set evolving, so occasional bugs or limitations as product matures.

Best for:

Website owners and SEO professionals looking for a scalable, automated internal linking solution compatible with multiple CMS platforms, who want a balance between AI-driven suggestions and manual customization.

Pricing & Customer reviews:

Pricing varies based on site size and features; users typically find Linksy offers competitive rates compared to premium tools like Inlinks. On platforms like G2 and Capterra, reviewers highlight Linksy’s intuitive interface and time-saving automation, though some wish for clearer pricing and expanded features. Overall, Linksy scores around 4.2/5, praised for semantic linking accuracy and customer support responsiveness.

Linksy vs Inlinks: Summary

Linksy and Inlinks both provide automated internal linking solutions but target slightly different user needs. Linksy focuses on AI-driven semantic link suggestions with broader CMS compatibility and offers greater manual control over link editing, making it suitable for users wanting flexibility and automation. Inlinks adds schema markup and a tightly integrated linking ecosystem but is often more expensive and primarily WordPress-oriented, with links disappearing after subscription cancellation.

Linksy’s evolving feature set and competitive pricing appeal to those managing multiple sites on diverse platforms, while Inlinks suits those who want a mature, all-in-one semantic linking and schema solution. Choosing between them hinges on CMS requirements, budget, and desired control over linking processes.

How to Choose the InLink Alternative

Data-Driven Analysis:

• Opt for tools that provide in-depth insights into your internal linking structure.
  
• Features to look for include visual graphs, force-directed crawl diagrams, link scoring metrics, and orphan page identification.
  
• These visualizations help you understand gaps and strengths in your site’s linking without forcing automated link placement.
  
• Especially important if you prefer to retain manual control over where and how links are added.

CMS Flexibility:

• Choose a tool compatible with a wide range of Content Management Systems (CMS), including WordPress, Joomla, Drupal, or custom-built platforms.
  
• If you manage multiple sites on different platforms, platform-agnostic tools that use JavaScript snippets or API integrations are preferable.
  
• Avoid tools locked into a single CMS unless you exclusively use that CMS.

Transparent Pricing:

• Select tools with clear and predictable pricing structures.
  
• Pricing should scale fairly based on the number of URLs, monthly usage, or feature access without hidden fees.
  
• Avoid excessive per-URL charges or surprise costs that balloon with site size.
  
• Ideally, pricing tiers should allow you to pick a plan that aligns with your current needs and grow as your site grows.

Customization & Manual Control:

• The tool should allow you to manually review, approve, and place internal links rather than forcing full automation.
  
• Being able to customize link anchor texts, target URLs, and placement context is crucial to maintain SEO strategy and content relevance.
  
• This ensures that the tool supports your workflows without overriding editorial decisions.

Performance Tracking & SEO Impact:

• Prefer tools that integrate with your existing analytics systems (e.g., Google Analytics, Google Search Console).
  
• Look for features that track the impact of internal linking efforts on key metrics like traffic growth, bounce rates, and rankings.
  
• This feedback loop is vital to justify investment and optimize link-building strategies over time.

Support, Documentation & Training:

• Good vendor support including comprehensive documentation, video tutorials, webinars, or live demos helps smooth onboarding.
  
• Advanced features like custom scripting, API integrations, or complex visualizations benefit from training resources.
  
• Access to community forums or responsive customer service is a plus, especially when troubleshooting or customizing workflows.

Conclusion

 A variety of alternatives are available to InLink which cater to different needs and preferences. The choice depends on whether you want to prioritize CMS flexibility, manual control, advanced data visualization or use budget-friendly options. 

Tools like Screaming Frog, Ahrefs, LinkBoss, Link Whisper, LinkStorm, and custom Python scripts provide robust solutions. Choosing the right alternative depends on your website size, technical expertise, and specific internal linking goals. Exploring these options ensures you find the best fit to enhance your site’s internal link structure and SEO performance.

FAQ