InLinks Alternative: Entity Links vs Per-Change Control

Keep InLinks if topic and silo rules, or writer coordination, run your editorial process. Trial SEOJuice if you want internal links, meta, schema and alt text controlled separately, one change type at a time. Do not switch on the assumption that linking will take less effort. Measure it with the worksheet below.

TL;DR: For one website billed monthly, SEOJuice costs $59, VAT included. InLinks starts at $49/month or a local equivalent. Billed yearly, SEOJuice is $599 per website. For an InLinks five-site or annual total: no public figure found (19 Oct 2026). (Its 2023 price table tied the $49 level to a 100-page allowance.) Prices checked 19 October 2026.

I build SEOJuice, and I'd judge a linking tool by the useful links I keep and the time I spend correcting the rest.

The same job: useful links, reviewed and maintained

Both products place internal links on your pages and leave a human to judge them. The differences sit in the model behind the links and in where the edits end up.

Here is what the SEOJuice side looks like in the demo site, which has 272 pages. The Internal Links view lists 207 links covering 77.5% of pages. A reviewer reads the surrounding sentence first and rejects any link that breaks it, before the relevance score even matters.

The Changes view follows the same pattern. The demo shows 80 changes waiting for review, 304 live and 18 closed, each with Approve and Reject. Title and H1 rewrites always start as suggestions; I'd rather approve a headline than apologise for one.

Where InLinks is the better fit

InLinks is my pick when your editors want a topic model to govern linking. Its topic associations and contextual/silo rules let you state which page owns which subject, and a page can carry several topics.

SEOJuice organises its controls by site and change type. If topic ownership is what drives your linking decisions, keep InLinks.

InLinks also bundles keyword and question research, competitor gap analysis, briefs, an editor and an AI writing assistant, plus assignments, deadlines and comments for writers. A content team that works from briefs gets more from that than from SEOJuice's monitoring and reports (which only earn their place if someone reads them).

Reviewers describe the appeal in agency terms. One Trustpilot reviewer says InLinks "automates many processes that SEO agencies would usually do manually."

Compare the bill for the same sites and workload

Use one 100-page website, then five 100-page websites. SEOJuice needs no extra capacity bundles for either. These are buying scenarios, not performance tests, and the annual rows show the full yearly payment.

SEOJuice prices are USD with VAT included. InLinks' tax treatment was not stated where we checked, so its $49 may not be the full amount paid. Details are on the pricing page.

The trial starts on monthly billing. Yearly billing opens after the first charge. On the InLinks side, the 2023 table priced the next level, 205 pages, at $98, so a bigger site moves up a tier there.

Install, divide ownership and switch

Whoever controls site deployment authorises the install. Often a developer signs off on the script or plugin, and the content lead signs off on the links. InLinks needs its footer script added and validated. SEOJuice needs the snippet, a WordPress plugin, a Ghost or Strapi API connection, a Webflow connection (internal links only) or a Cloudflare Worker, and the administrator of that system approves it.

Each route puts changes somewhere different. Snippet changes exist only at render, while WordPress, Ghost and Strapi write into stored content and the Worker rewrites at the edge.

Your current tool can stay. Pick one owner for each field: links, schema, titles, alt text.

If InLinks owns links and schema, switch those SEOJuice change types off while you try the rest. The same works with Yoast, Rank Math, SEOPress or AIOSEO. Each SEOJuice change type can be switched off per site, so the plugin keeps its field.

I'd hand titles to the existing plugin first, since editors usually want to own them.

After a republish, check the rendered page and the stored post separately. A snippet link shows up only in the render. A CMS write shows up in stored content. Look for duplicate anchors and doubled schema (snippet schema fills gaps only, so doubles should be rare, but I'd still look).

Test total effort with a worksheet

Use the same sample for each product: a few articles, a few service pages and one page that covers several topics. Run one product at a time on those pages. Start with links alone, so other changes don't blur the result. In SEOJuice, set links to suggest and approve a small batch before you consider auto-deploy.

The numbers below are hypothetical. Tool A and Tool B are placeholders, not measured results for either product.

Set the acceptance threshold before you look at results. Say 3 minutes per retained link and at least 60% of proposed links kept. Tool B proposes more than twice as many links and lands at almost the same cost per retained link. It also keeps only 50% of them, so it fails the floor. Tool A keeps 70% and passes.

One G2 reviewer wrote "I have reduced the time spent by the team on internal linking and schema by more than 3 times." That is a 2020 review from one person, covering links and schema together. It is a reason to run the test.

If a completed worksheet favours SEOJuice, move one site first and read how SEO automation fits an editorial workflow. If it favours InLinks, you have your answer and the subscription stays.

Questions to settle before changing tools

Will SEOJuice replace the topic controls my editors use in InLinks?

Only if your editors can work from change-type controls. If they need explicit topic associations and silo rules to decide a link, keep InLinks and test SEOJuice on a site where that matters less.

Can I review links before they go live?

Yes. Set internal links to suggest, approve the batch you want, and leave other change types off. Non-auto changes wait as proposed, and any live change can be reverted. InLinks also lets you review, edit and remove links before the first snippet deployment.

Will switching mean less work for my team?

Unknown until you run the worksheet. Reviewers disagree: another Trustpilot reviewer calls InLinks "Overly complicated interface and logic and bad customer support." Run the worksheet on your sample.

What counts as the first useful result?

A reviewed set of links your editor wants to keep, where each anchor fits its sentence and each destination answers the reader's next question. A ranking change is a separate outcome and takes longer to read.

What happens to my links if I leave?

Ask two questions of each tool: which links stay in stored content, and which disappear when the delivery route stops? For SEOJuice, changes already made stay live and keep being served, and it stops creating new ones. Export your data (CSV) while you are subscribed. For InLinks, ask about your route: the footer script or third-party Sync.

Who should pick which

Pick InLinks if topic associations, silo rules and writer assignments sit at the centre of your process. Stay with it if your review time is already acceptable. I see no reason to switch just to save money.

Try SEOJuice if you want linking, meta, schema and alt text under separate controls, with monitoring and unlimited white-label reports at a per-website price. It suits agencies that will use the reports and teams that want to start in suggest mode.

Don't buy SEOJuice if you need a topic model to run your linking, expect zero editorial review, or want a promised ranking gain.

Start the 7-day free trial. Card required; then $59/month unless you cancel before the trial ends. Forgot to cancel? Email hello@seojuice.com within 3 days of your first charge and we refund it. Or explore the demo, which uses demo data.