SEO Tools: Semrush, Ahrefs vs. Moz

1. Product Information

2. Product Functions (SEO Aspects)

3. User Analysis

3.1 Data Scale

In terms of keywords, the units of data disclosed by the three companies differ, but the overall ranking is roughly: Ahrefs > Semrush > Moz.
In terms of the number of links, Moz does not distinguish between internal and external links, and the overall ranking of external links is roughly: Ahrefs > Semrush > Moz.
Overall, Ahrefs has the largest scale, followed by Semrush, and Moz is the smallest among the three.

3.2 User Personas

Semrush:

• Persona 1: A UX designer of a small enterprise, using Semrush to quickly understand a website’s SEO performance and obtain comprehensive information in areas such as competitor analysis, keyword gaps, technical SEO issues, content effectiveness, and content marketing.
• Persona 2: A founder and full-stack marketer of a small enterprise, using Semrush to formulate strategies, guide clients, and explain SEO in a clear way that clients can understand.
• Persona 3: An SEO strategy director of a large enterprise, using Semrush’s tool suite to seamlessly integrate SEO strategies, be data-driven, and help the enterprise achieve measurable results and growth.

Ahrefs:

• Persona 1: An SEO engineer of a small enterprise, using Ahrefs for keyword research, competitor analysis, ranking tracking, and content ideation.
• Persona 2: A digital director of a large enterprise, using Ahrefs to browse SERP rankings.
• Persona 3: A director of a medium-sized enterprise, leveraging Ahrefs’ team support and contact system to get started quickly and obtain accurate SEO data.

Moz:

• Persona 1: A digital marketing expert at a small agency, using Moz to generate SEO reports for data-driven decision-making by clients.
• Persona 2: A digital strategist of a small enterprise, using Moz’s monthly customized reports and customer support functions to make decisions.
• Persona 3: An SEO director of a small enterprise, using Moz to efficiently manage multiple websites and advertising campaigns.

4. Requirement Analysis

According to the KANO model, users’ requirements for products can be divided into Basic Needs, Expectant Needs, Attractive Needs, Indifferent Needs, and Reverse Needs.

The following is the user requirement analysis for SEO tools:

4.1 Basic Needs

• Analyze competitor website traffic and obtain audience data.
• SEO optimization, including keyword research, backlink analysis, and organic search ranking tracking.
• Create high-ranking SEO content and get real-time ratings.
• Check SERPs and browse SERP rankings.
• Sitemap generation.

4.2 Expectant Needs

• Full-link collaborative marketing, such as integrating PPC advertising marketing.
• A comprehensive customer support team to help SEO beginners get started quickly.

4.3 Attractive Needs

• AI-driven full-process SEO strategy generation.
• Cross-border SEO covering more global regions.

4.4 Indifferent Needs

• Basic customer service.
• Basic data visualization functions.

4.5 Reverse Needs

• Redundant functions with high entry barriers for new users.
• Inaccurate data, such as significant deviations compared to Google Search Console.

Semrush, Ahrefs & Moz’s Performance in Each Kind of Needs:

• Basic Needs: Ahrefs excels in competitor traffic and audience analysis, keyword research, etc., with an 80-trillion-level backlink index and fast data updates. Semrush can integrate multi-channel traffic data, with keyword tools supporting intelligent clustering and SERP analysis identifying opportunities. Moz has basic functions but is weak in traffic segmentation, data updates, and lacks depth in sitemap analysis.
• Expectant Needs: Semrush has obvious advantages in full-link collaborative marketing, enabling simultaneous monitoring of advertising and organic search rankings and providing functions like ad copy generation. Moz‘s customer support team is more novice-friendly, with a complete course system and hands-on exercises. Ahrefs can analyze CPC ads but lacks direct launch functions, and customer support has slow response.
• Attractive Needs: Semrush‘s “AI Workspace” enables multi-function automation, with cross-border support covering 140 regions. Ahrefs‘ AI focuses on content optimization, cross-border SEO supporting 170 countries, and in-depth localized analysis. Moz‘s AI functions are not systematic, and cross-border services mainly target English-speaking markets, lacking localized search behavior analysis.
• Indifferent Needs: Semrush has powerful data visualization suitable for enterprise reporting. Ahrefs‘ visualization is concise, helping technical teams locate issues. Moz‘s chart functions are basic with limited interactivity. All three offer email support and knowledge bases, but response speeds and resource characteristics vary.
• Reverse Needs: Ahrefs focuses on functions, suitable for experienced users. Semrush has numerous functions, easy to confuse new users. Moz has a friendly interface but insufficient advanced functions. In terms of data accuracy, Ahrefs has high consistency with Google Search Console, Semrush’s keyword search volume estimation is relatively accurate, and some of Moz’s indicators are often questioned.

5. Pricing

All three products profit through subscription membership systems. The following is a comparison of their membership levels and prices:

• Semrush adopts a stepped high-price strategy. The basic version in its four-tier pricing system is significantly more expensive than competitors, and the highest-tier customized services require negotiated pricing. It targets medium-to-large enterprises and professional institutions with sufficient budgets that pursue data depth and functional richness, leveraging full-link marketing capabilities.
• Ahrefs implements differentiated hierarchical pricing. Its five-tier packages have a wide price range, attracting small and medium teams with low-price entry packages and serving large multinational enterprises with high-price packages, balancing user base expansion and high-end market value enhancement.
• Moz occupies the market with affordable pricing, maintaining overall low prices. Combining easy-to-use operations with complete basic functions, it focuses on small and medium enterprises, SEO beginners, and individual users with limited budgets, meeting users’ functional expansion needs through mid-to-high-tier packages.