Comparison / Scrunch
Altyzo vs Scrunch: Mirror site vs. doing the work
Scrunch monitors and reshapes how AI reads your site. Altyzo's agents produce the evidence engines cite.
Full comparison
Scrunch is the enterprise-facing play in AI visibility — and now part of Sitecore after raising $26M. Its pitch covers monitoring across nine AI platforms (ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity, Gemini, Meta AI, AI Mode, AI Overviews, Copilot, Grok), persona and fan-out tracking, agent-traffic analytics, and its signature feature: an AI-optimized version of your site generated for agents to read — a machine-facing mirror of your content.
That last part is the genuinely different idea in the category. It's also a bet: engines increasingly crawl the real web, and an AI-facing copy is only as good as the evidence underneath it.
Altyzo's position: the agents produce and ship the real evidence — citation-structured content, entity fixes, third-party corroboration — on your actual site, on infrastructure you own, for a flat license.
Where Altyzo wins
Real pages, not a parallel site
Scrunch's mirror-site approach optimizes a rendered layer for agents; Altyzo makes the canonical pages themselves citable — answer-first structure, original data, schema — then publishes and tracks them. If engines converge on crawling real content (they're already doing so), the asset is on your domain, not a service layer.
Full execution pipeline
Scrunch shows the gaps and the personas; the content that closes them is still your team's job. Altyzo's seven agents run the loop end to end — research, write, publish to WordPress/Shopify/Webflow, monitor, adjust — with your review, not your production.
Flat license vs enterprise SaaS
Scrunch starts at $250/mo for 125 prompts/4 models and goes custom for Enterprise — the normal enterprise-SaaS arc, now inside Sitecore's pricing motion. Altyzo is $30K once, unlimited clients, self-hosted — a capital asset, not a metered subscription.
Your data, your infrastructure
Scrunch hosts your analytics and the mirror site. Altyzo runs on your servers. For agencies whose clients ask where the data lives, that difference is a selling point, not a spec.
Where Scrunch still has the edge
Nine-platform coverage and agent-traffic analytics
Scrunch tracks agent sessions on your site — actual AI-bot traffic, not just prompt results — plus broadest-in-category model coverage. That instrumentation is legitimately deep.
Enterprise machinery, now Sitecore-backed
Dedicated support, security review, procurement process — and a $26M-backed product now embedded in a public company's ecosystem. For enterprise buying criteria, Scrunch checks boxes a young company can't yet.
The mirror-site thesis itself
If agent-facing rendering becomes a durable pattern, Scrunch owns early ground. Worth watching; call it a differentiated bet, not a safe one.
The honest take
Scrunch is a serious enterprise platform with one genuinely novel idea (the AI-facing site). The trade-off is the usual one at this tier: custom enterprise pricing, measurement-first, and a roadmap now answering to an acquirer. If your bottleneck is producing the evidence — not instrumenting it — that's the layer we sell.
Altyzo vs Scrunch: side by side
| Feature | Altyzo | Scrunch |
|---|---|---|
| Type | Autonomous agent platform (execution) | AI visibility + agent-experience platform (Sitecore) |
| Engine coverage | ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, AI Overviews, Gemini, Copilot | 9 platforms incl. Meta AI, Grok, AI Mode |
| Signature feature | Seven-agent execution pipeline | AI-optimized mirror of your site |
| Content production | Agents write in client voice, publish to CMS | Not available — monitoring + site layer |
| Acting on data | Agents close the loop | Your team + the mirror layer |
| Refresh cadence | Continuous | ~Every 3 days |
| Pricing | $30K one-time, unlimited clients | $250/mo Core (125 prompts, 4 models); Enterprise custom |
| Independence | Independent, self-hosted | Sitecore-owned (acquired after $26M raised) |
| Deployment | Your infrastructure (Docker) | Scrunch SaaS |
| Trial | Managed pilots | 7-day free trial |
Choose based on what you actually need
Choose Altyzo if: Your bottleneck is producing citable evidence at scale — agency economics, flat license, self-hosted, and you want the canonical site to be the asset.
Choose Scrunch if: You're an enterprise team that wants deep agent-traffic instrumentation, nine-platform monitoring, and the mirror-site approach — inside a Sitecore-vendor relationship.
Common questions
Is Scrunch's AI-optimized site a real advantage?
It's the boldest bet in the category — generating an agent-facing version of your site. Honest read: useful if agents reward it, redundant if engines keep converging on real crawling (which the trend suggests). Our position: make the real pages citable and you don't need the mirror.
Does Sitecore ownership change Scrunch?
Two-edged: more resources and enterprise polish; also integration pressure and roadmap shifts typical post-acquisition. If you're mid-eval, treat the next two quarters of the roadmap as unknown.
Which handles agencies better?
Scrunch's Enterprise tier covers multi-brand setups at custom pricing; Altyzo's license is unlimited-client by default. For an agency cost model, flat-beats-custom is nearly always true at scale.
Can they coexist?
They overlap on monitoring but not mechanics — Scrunch instruments agents reading your site; Altyzo produces the content those agents cite. You'd rarely need both; if forced to pick, pick the layer that's missing (usually the production).
More comparisons