Wrenda vs Encited
Both sit in front of your site and both report on AI visibility. They differ in how much control you get over what each individual crawler receives, and in what happens when you run past your plan allowance.
The short version
The overlap is large. Both pre-render for search bots, both serve Markdown to AI agents, both track brand mentions in AI answers with competitor share of voice, both read fan-out queries, both integrate Search Console, and both ship an MCP endpoint. Feature lists will not separate these two.
Encited is the cheaper entry point and crawls your whole site. Its audit sweeps 3,000 to 30,000 pages against 35+ technical SEO issue types, which is a different and wider job than Wrenda's page and template audit. It starts at $49 per month billed annually. If you want one product to replace a general SEO stack, that is the stronger fit.
Wrenda gives you per-crawler control and a bill that cannot move. Every request is matched against rules covering 82 known crawler user-agents, and you choose per bot whether it is optimized, pre-rendered, passed through, or blocked. The plan allowance is a hard cap rather than an invoice: there is no overage charge at any tier, and at the limit your site keeps serving from cache or straight from your origin. Optimizations are then verified against Search Console and scored won or flat, so you can see which ones actually did anything.
Feature by feature
Where the two products count things differently, the row says so rather than forcing a false like-for-like.
| Feature | Wrenda | Encited |
|---|---|---|
| Serving | ||
| How traffic reaches the platform | DNS CNAME to proxy.wrenda.ai | Edge proxy or API integration |
| Per-crawler serving rulesWrenda matches each bot against rules covering 82 known crawler user-agents and applies one of four treatments. | Optimize, pre-render, pass through or block — set per user-agent | AI-optimised pre-rendering |
| What AI crawlers receiveBoth serve Markdown to AI agents — Wrenda returns text/markdown on the optimized variant. Neither invents facts; both restructure what the page already says. | Enriched semantic HTML or Markdown, built from facts already on the page | Markdown for AI agents, HTML for search engines |
| Pre-rendering for search bots | ||
| Evaluate before changing anything | Shadow mode — rules run and are recorded, nothing served is altered | |
| Human visitors affected | ||
| Limits and billing | ||
| Entry priceEncited also lists a $19/mo Basic plan for one site. Encited’s headline prices are annual-billing rates. | $149/mo | $49/mo billed annually |
| Free trial | 14 days, no card | 14 days, no card |
| Charge for going over your allowance | None — there is no overage billing | $2.00 to $1.25 per 1,000 renders, by plan |
| What happens at the limitWrenda treats the plan limit as a hard cap rather than an invoice. Your site keeps serving either way. | Cached copy is served where one exists, everything else passes through to your origin untouched | Renders continue and are billed as overage |
| Free tier | ||
| Measurement | ||
| AI citation trackingThe two are counted differently — Wrenda by tracked prompts per plan (50 to 500), Encited by prompts included per tier with extras sold separately. | Six platforms: ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Google AI, Copilot, Grok | Prompt-based tracking, 15 to 100 prompts by plan |
| Competitor share of voice | ||
| Fan-out query insights | Business plan and above | |
| Page audit and optimization suggestionsDifferent shapes rather than one being absent. Encited crawls the whole site for technical SEO issues. Wrenda audits pages and templates to propose optimizations it can then apply and verify. | Meta description, schema markup, entity, pre-render and AI-visibility suggestions, each rated for impact and confidence | Full-site audit against 35+ issue types, 3,000 to 30,000 pages per audit |
| Crawl log analysis | Per-request crawler logs with platform attribution | Crawl log analysis cross-checked against Search Console |
| Search Console integration | Captures a baseline, then scores each optimization won or flat after about two weeks | Crawl logs cross-checked against Search Console |
| Analytics retention | Raw request logs 14 days, aggregated 13 months | Not published |
| Automation | ||
| MCP endpoint | Platform MCP on every plan, plus a per-domain MCP server | Encited MCP, plus a Keywords and Search Console MCP |
| Create optimizations programmatically | Yes — your own agent can file page and template optimizations | Content Agents, sold in credits |
| Alerts and scheduled reports | Usage, activity-drop, error-rate and cache alerts, plus scheduled email reports | Page issue alerts and scheduled reports on Agency and above |
| CDN cache rules and cache warming | Cache rules by MIME type and path, plus sitemap-driven cache warming | Per-path cache rules with daily refresh |
| Team seats | 3 to 50 by plan | 3 to 15 by plan |
| SEO split testing | Early access, requires your own Search Console connection | |
Encited figures are taken from encited.com’s published pricing and product pages, read 24 September 2026, and are quoted at the annual-billing rates shown there. Wrenda figures reflect wrenda.ai/pricing on the same date. Both vendors change pricing — check current published terms before relying on these numbers.
Choose Encited if
- You want a full-site technical SEO audit as part of the same product.
- Budget is the deciding factor and the entry price matters most.
- You manage many client sites and want agency-tier site counts.
- Markdown delivery to AI agents is specifically what you are after.
Choose Wrenda if
- You want a different treatment per crawler, including blocking the ones that take without citing.
- A predictable bill matters — no request beyond your allowance is ever charged.
- You want to watch rules run in shadow mode before anything you serve changes.
- You want your own agent to file optimizations through an MCP endpoint included on every plan.
Wrenda vs Encited — common questions
Straight answers, including where Encited is the better choice.
Less than the feature lists suggest — both pre-render, both serve Markdown to AI agents, both track AI citations and fan-out queries, and both offer an MCP endpoint. Two things genuinely separate them. Wrenda matches every request against per-user-agent rules and applies one of four treatments — optimize, pre-render, pass through, or block — and treats your plan allowance as a hard cap with no overage billing at any tier. Encited crawls your whole site against 35+ technical SEO issue types, which is wider than Wrenda’s page and template audit, and it bills renders beyond your allowance as overage.
Yes, at the entry point. Encited publishes plans from $49 per month billed annually, plus a $19 per month Basic plan, against Wrenda’s $149 per month Starter. If budget is the deciding factor, Encited starts lower. Wrenda’s pricing reflects that no request beyond your allowance is ever billed as overage, so your monthly cost cannot exceed the plan price.
No. Optimisation is gated by user-agent. Browsers are passed through to your origin untouched, and you choose the treatment for every crawler. Only the bots you configure receive an enriched or pre-rendered version.
Your site does not go down and you are not billed more. At the cap Wrenda serves the cached copy where one exists and passes everything else straight through to your origin. You are emailed on the day you reach the limit and daily after that; after 30 days every request passes through until you upgrade.
Both offer a 14-day free trial with no card required, so running them side by side on the same site is practical. Wrenda additionally has a shadow mode, where rules are evaluated and recorded but nothing served is altered — useful for seeing what would have happened before anything changes.
Try it on your own site
14 days, no card. New domains start in shadow mode, so you can see what would happen before anything you serve changes.