GITNUXSOFTWARE ADVICE
Digital MarketingTop 10 Best Keyword Seo Software of 2026
Ranked comparison of Keyword Seo Software for SERP research and keyword tracking, covering Semrush, Ahrefs, and Moz Pro for buyers.
How we ranked these tools
Core product claims cross-referenced against official documentation, changelogs, and independent technical reviews.
Analyzed video reviews and hundreds of written evaluations to capture real-world user experiences with each tool.
AI persona simulations modeled how different user types would experience each tool across common use cases and workflows.
Final rankings reviewed and approved by our editorial team with authority to override AI-generated scores based on domain expertise.
Score: Features 40% · Ease 30% · Value 30%
Gitnux may earn a commission through links on this page — this does not influence rankings. Editorial policy
Editor’s top 3 picks
Three quick recommendations before you dive into the full comparison below — each one leads on a different dimension.
Semrush
API plus project-based keyword tracking keeps research, SERP context, and ranking movement tied together.
Built for fits when SEO teams need keyword intelligence plus automation and API-driven reporting across multiple markets..
Ahrefs
Editor pickAhrefs API for keyword research and site data extraction enables automated reporting refreshes.
Built for fits when SEO teams need API-driven keyword and backlink data ingestion into internal reporting..
Moz Pro
Editor pickKeyword rankings tracking tied to project targets and exportable reports.
Built for fits when teams need keyword tracking workflows with automation and controlled project access..
Related reading
Comparison Table
This comparison table benchmarks keyword SEO platforms across integration depth, data model design, and automation plus API surface. It also scores admin and governance controls such as RBAC, provisioning workflows, and audit log coverage to show how teams manage access and changes at scale.
Semrush
keyword suiteProvides keyword research, keyword gap analysis, SERP tracking, and on-page SEO audits built around search visibility and competitor data.
API plus project-based keyword tracking keeps research, SERP context, and ranking movement tied together.
Semrush builds keyword intelligence around measurable entities like keywords, domains, locations, and SERP features, then keeps those relationships consistent across projects. Keyword research output can be wired into ranking tracking so teams monitor position changes for selected keywords by device and geography. Competitive research expands the same model to competitor domains, letting comparisons reuse the same underlying schema rather than switching tools for each view.
A key tradeoff appears in governance and data hygiene. Large keyword sets require careful scoping of projects, markets, and device types to avoid cluttered dashboards and confusing attribution in reports. Semrush fits teams that need controlled provisioning of multiple SEO workstreams and want keyword tracking and content planning to stay connected through shared entities.
- +Keyword research and rank tracking share a consistent entity model
- +Competitive domain and SERP feature data supports targeted keyword gap workflows
- +API enables automation for scheduled pulls and bulk project updates
- +Project scoping by market and device reduces mixed-signal reporting
- –Cross-project keyword overlap can complicate attribution without strict naming
- –Automation requires schema alignment to preserve meaning across markets
- –Dashboard configuration can become heavy for very large keyword inventories
Best for: Fits when SEO teams need keyword intelligence plus automation and API-driven reporting across multiple markets.
More related reading
Ahrefs
keyword suiteDelivers keyword research, SERP position tracking, content and link analysis, and a site audit workflow for SEO diagnostics.
Ahrefs API for keyword research and site data extraction enables automated reporting refreshes.
Ahrefs centers on a data model that ties keyword sets to SERP signals, competitor pages, and backlink profiles so analysts can trace how rankings connect to link patterns. Keyword research outputs include difficulty and volume fields plus SERP feature notes, which makes downstream dashboards easier to normalize into a consistent schema. The automation surface includes an API that can pull keyword and site-level datasets for ingestion and reporting.
A concrete tradeoff is that Ahrefs automation is extraction-first, not a fully programmable ETL engine with built-in governance workflows per task. Teams that need deep multi-step approvals, per-export RBAC, or audit log retention outside the Ahrefs account model may find gaps. Ahrefs fits situations where SEO data needs to flow into an internal warehouse for reporting refreshes and change monitoring.
- +Keyword datasets include difficulty, volume, and SERP context for consistent schema mapping
- +API-driven extraction supports scheduled ingestion into dashboards and warehouses
- +Backlink context links keyword targets to competitor link profiles for traceability
- +Export outputs are structured enough to automate downstream reporting pipelines
- –Automation is primarily pull-based rather than workflow orchestration
- –Granular RBAC and external audit log controls are limited for larger governance needs
- –Automation throughput can require rate planning for high-frequency crawls
- –Data normalization work is needed to merge Ahrefs entities with internal schemas
Best for: Fits when SEO teams need API-driven keyword and backlink data ingestion into internal reporting.
Moz Pro
rank trackingIncludes keyword research, SERP analysis, rank tracking, and crawl-based site audits designed for SEO reporting.
Keyword rankings tracking tied to project targets and exportable reports.
Moz Pro focuses on keyword research, SERP tracking, and site crawling with a data model built around keywords, URLs, and ranked targets inside named projects. Reports can be exported for downstream dashboards, and saved views keep teams aligned on which keyword sets map to which pages. Integration depth is strongest for teams that already run spreadsheet-style reporting and want consistent exports across audits and rankings. Extensibility also benefits organizations that plan to script report generation and data pulls through its API surface.
A practical tradeoff is that automation coverage concentrates on search visibility and crawling outputs, while heavier CMS-level governance or schema-level validation is not the core workflow. Moz Pro fits when a marketing operations team needs recurring keyword-to-page mapping, periodic crawl checks, and consistent reporting across multiple sites. It also fits when a small platform team wants to provision keyword tracking projects and then automate pulls of ranking and audit artifacts for a BI layer.
- +Clear keyword data model with project-scoped tracking targets
- +API surface supports automation of keyword and report data extraction
- +Exportable reports help consistent downstream BI and spreadsheet workflows
- +RBAC-style access limits project changes by role
- +Crawl results and rankings stay connected through URL-based reporting
- –Schema-level governance for custom fields is limited outside core objects
- –Automation focus skews toward reporting data rather than CMS writes
- –Admin controls are practical but not granular to every workflow step
Best for: Fits when teams need keyword tracking workflows with automation and controlled project access.
Serpstat
keyword analyticsOffers keyword research, competitor keyword comparison, rank tracking, and site audit features for keyword-to-traffic planning.
SERP position tracking tied to keyword projects for continuous monitoring and comparison.
Serpstat concentrates keyword SEO around a structured data model for keyword research, SERP tracking, and competitor analysis. Its integration depth is geared toward search and content workflows, with exports and shareable views that reduce manual data handling.
Automation and API surface are central for teams that need provisioning, scheduled updates, and repeatable reporting across projects. Admin and governance controls are oriented around workspace configuration and access management, with audit-friendly change tracking expected for operational safety.
- +Unified data model links keyword research, SERP data, and competitor context.
- +SERP tracking supports ongoing visibility for targeted queries and domains.
- +Exports and saved views reduce repeat manual report assembly.
- –Automation depth can feel limited without strong, documented API coverage.
- –Bulk operations may require careful workflow design to maintain schema consistency.
- –Governance controls are less transparent than enterprise audit expectations.
Best for: Fits when teams need repeatable keyword workflows with exports and automation around SERP tracking.
KWFinder
keyword discoveryFocuses on keyword discovery with difficulty scoring, SERP overview, and ranking insights for targeted keyword selection.
SERP-based keyword metrics in KWFinder that support intent and competition screening.
KWFinder provides keyword research with SERP-based metrics, letting teams validate intent and competition before planning content. The workflow centers on saved keyword lists, SERP overview views, and exportable results that support downstream analysis.
Integration depth is primarily driven by CSV export and project management inside the UI, with limited visibility into API-based automation. Automation and governance controls are mostly configuration and internal organization features rather than documented provisioning, RBAC, or audit logging.
- +SERP overview that helps filter keywords by visible competition signals
- +Project keyword lists keep research organized across topics
- +Exports deliver structured keyword data for external analysis pipelines
- –Limited documented API surface reduces automation and system integration options
- –Governance tooling like RBAC and audit logs is not clearly surfaced
- –Automation appears UI-driven rather than workflow-driven at the integration layer
Best for: Fits when keyword research needs repeatable exports and SERP checks, not deep automation.
Mangools
suite bundleBundles KWFinder with SERPWatcher for rank tracking and other SEO tools that support keyword research to reporting.
Keyword difficulty and SERP preview views built around a single keyword project workspace.
Mangools fits teams that need fast keyword research with export-ready outputs and repeatable reporting workflows. It centralizes keyword data, SERP previews, and competitor visibility inside a shared keyword project model.
Integration depth is mostly tool-to-report workflows rather than deep third-party schema or event webhooks. Automation and governance rely on user-level access controls and manual export schedules, with limited documented API-driven provisioning.
- +Keyword research UI that maps directly into exportable keyword lists
- +SERP and competitor views linked to the same keyword workspace
- +Project structure supports repeatable reporting across multiple domains
- +Clear data fields for volume, difficulty, CPC, and trends
- –Limited documented API surface for automation and integrations
- –Schema extensibility and custom fields are not visibly first-class
- –Audit log and RBAC granularity are not emphasized for governance
- –Throughput for large keyword imports depends on manual workflow design
Best for: Fits when teams need keyword research and reporting with minimal integration requirements.
Rival IQ
competitive trackingProvides keyword and competitor monitoring with SERP change tracking and performance reporting for SEO content decisions.
API-driven provisioning for keyword tracking and competitive query set synchronization.
Rival IQ connects keyword and competitive performance data to a workflow built around account-level keyword tracking. Its schema centers on influencer and content signals tied to specific queries, domains, and competitor identities.
Integration depth shows up through its API surface for provisioning and syncing reporting configurations and keyword sets. Automation and governance depend on how teams segment access and manage changes through auditable configuration updates.
- +API supports syncing keyword tracking configurations to external systems
- +Data model ties keywords to competitors and content signals
- +Automation reduces manual upkeep of keyword sets and comparisons
- +Extensibility favors schema-aligned ingestion of query tracking signals
- –Keyword models can require careful mapping to competitor identities
- –Advanced governance controls may lag teams needing strict RBAC granularity
- –Automation throughput can bottleneck on high-volume keyword refresh jobs
- –Schema changes can require coordinated updates across connected workflows
Best for: Fits when teams need API-driven keyword tracking tied to competitor content signals.
SpyFu
competitive intelligenceSupplies keyword research plus competitor paid and organic keyword intelligence and supports rank and visibility research.
Competitor domain history ties organic rankings and PPC keywords into one pivotable dataset.
SpyFu concentrates on competitor intelligence and keyword research inside a defined SEO data model. The tool links search terms to domains, ads history, and organic visibility so users can pivot through shared entities.
Automation is available through export workflows and programmatic options via an API surface for pulling keyword, domain, and ranking-related datasets. Administration and governance focus on account-level access, with auditability patterns tied to workspace usage rather than granular RBAC controls.
- +Domain-to-keyword linkage connects competitor terms to visibility history
- +Ads history data supports PPC-to-SEO planning across shared keyword entities
- +API and exports reduce manual retyping for reporting pipelines
- –RBAC depth and permission granularity appear limited for multi-team governance
- –Automation relies on exports or API access instead of built-in job scheduling
- –Data schema consistency across reports needs validation for automated merges
Best for: Fits when teams automate competitor keyword research and reporting using API plus controlled exports.
Nightwatch
rank trackingTracks keyword rankings with scheduled checks, device and location options, and reporting for SEO performance monitoring.
Keyword and project management via API for automated provisioning and result polling.
Nightwatch runs keyword ranking checks on scheduled intervals and records time series per domain. It provides an automation and API surface for adding keywords, managing projects, and polling results for downstream workflows.
The data model focuses on keyword, location, device, and search engine dimensions so results stay comparable across runs. Integration depth is driven by extensibility options and configurable reporting outputs that fit governance and operational monitoring.
- +Time series keyword tracking per domain with consistent comparison across runs
- +API supports programmatic project and keyword provisioning for automation
- +Configurable device and location dimensions for repeatable rank checks
- +Reporting outputs support operational review and downstream ingestion
- –Schema complexity rises with many engines, locales, and device targets
- –Automation setups require careful mapping of keywords to targets
- –Change control is harder without explicit RBAC patterns for every workflow
Best for: Fits when teams need keyword rank automation with an API-first workflow and controlled governance.
AccuRanker
rank trackingDelivers high-frequency keyword rank tracking with reporting and workflow features for SEO teams managing many keywords.
API access to keyword rank data with project-scoped tracking parameters.
AccuRanker fits teams that need controlled keyword tracking with automation hooks and documented data access. It centers on a structured data model for keywords, search engines, locations, and rank history so reporting and comparisons stay consistent.
The configuration and API surface support integration and provisioning workflows for marketing operations, SEO analysts, and reporting pipelines. Admin governance improves manageability through access controls and change visibility for large keyword sets.
- +Structured data model links keywords to engines, locations, and tracking parameters
- +API enables programmatic rank retrieval for dashboards and reporting pipelines
- +Automation supports workflow-driven updates instead of manual keyword handling
- +Granular configuration helps keep tracking scopes consistent across projects
- +RBAC-style access control reduces risk when multiple users manage projects
- –Large keyword volumes require careful schema design for predictable performance
- –API usage needs planning for rate limits and job orchestration
- –Advanced governance requires disciplined project and role management
- –Reporting customization can take time when schemas differ across trackers
Best for: Fits when teams need keyword rank tracking with API access and governed automation at scale.
How to Choose the Right Keyword Seo Software
This buyer's guide covers keyword SEO software evaluation across Semrush, Ahrefs, Moz Pro, Serpstat, KWFinder, Mangools, Rival IQ, SpyFu, Nightwatch, and AccuRanker.
The focus stays on integration depth, the underlying data model, automation and API surface, and admin governance controls. The guide maps those mechanisms to common workflow requirements like scheduled refresh, project scoping, and multi-user change management.
Keyword SEO software for structured keyword research, SERP tracking, and governed workflows
Keyword SEO software packages keyword research, SERP context, and rank tracking into a structured data model that stays consistent across projects. Semrush and Ahrefs illustrate how keyword entities, SERP features, and ranking movement can remain tied together so reporting can refresh on a schedule.
These tools solve two operational problems. They reduce manual keyword list maintenance with automation and API access, and they keep reporting outputs repeatable by locking targets to a project or tracking configuration.
Integration, data schema, automation, and governance controls that determine operational fit
Integration depth determines whether keyword data can flow into dashboards, warehouses, and reporting pipelines through API extraction or exports. Semrush and Ahrefs emphasize documented API endpoints that support scheduled pulls and bulk updates, while KWFinder and Mangools rely more on UI-driven lists and exports.
The data model controls whether entities stay comparable across markets, devices, and engines. Semrush calls out project scoping by market and device and warns that cross-project overlaps can complicate attribution without strict naming, which directly affects how attribution and reporting should be configured.
Documented API for keyword, SERP, and audit workflows
A documented API enables scheduled data refresh and programmatic provisioning of keyword sets and tracked targets. Semrush ties keyword research, SERP context, and ranking movement to a single API-driven project tracking workflow, while Ahrefs supports automated reporting refreshes for keyword research and site data extraction.
Project-scoped keyword tracking tied to ranking movement
Project scope keeps targets and outputs aligned when keyword inventories grow or multiple markets are tracked. Moz Pro and Serpstat tie keyword tracking to project targets and support exportable reports and continuous SERP monitoring, which reduces mismatched reporting across campaigns.
Data model schema consistency across keyword lists, SERP context, and competitors
Schema consistency affects whether automated merges remain accurate when data is pulled into internal stores. Semrush and Ahrefs both highlight the need for schema alignment to preserve meaning across markets, while SpyFu requires validation of schema consistency when automating merges across reports.
Automation throughput and orchestration behavior for high-volume refresh jobs
Automation throughput matters when keyword sets and tracking schedules are large. Nightwatch and AccuRanker center on scheduled checks and API-based project and keyword provisioning, while Ahrefs notes that automation is primarily pull-based and may require rate planning for high-frequency crawls.
Governance controls for multi-user operations
Admin and governance controls determine who can change projects, exports, and tracking configurations. Semrush offers project-based access scoping, Moz Pro uses role-based project change limits, and Rival IQ and Nightwatch focus on auditable configuration updates or controlled change management for keyword tracking setups.
Extensibility for downstream reporting and BI pipelines
Extensibility affects whether outputs can be wired into internal reporting systems without manual reformatting. Semrush and Ahrefs provide structured exports and reporting-friendly outputs, while Nightwatch and AccuRanker emphasize configurable reporting outputs that match operational monitoring needs.
A control-first selection framework for keyword tracking automation and governance
Selection should start with how data will move into internal systems. Semrush and Ahrefs fit when API-driven extraction supports scheduled ingestion into dashboards and warehouses, while KWFinder and Mangools fit when the workflow can remain UI-driven with periodic exports.
Next, decisions should focus on governance and change control because keyword tracking is operational work shared across roles. Moz Pro adds workspace permissions that limit who can change projects, while Rival IQ and Nightwatch depend on auditable configuration updates for safer change management.
Map required integrations to API versus export workflows
If scheduled refresh and internal ingestion are required, prioritize Semrush or Ahrefs because both emphasize documented API support for scheduled pulls and automated reporting refresh. If a process can stay export-centered, KWFinder can work because it delivers structured keyword exports, while Mangools leans on project lists and export-ready outputs.
Lock the data model to avoid entity drift across projects and markets
Choose a tool that keeps keyword entities, SERP context, and ranking movement tied together across the same project configuration. Semrush keeps research, SERP context, and ranking movement connected through project-based keyword tracking, while AccuRanker and Nightwatch keep rank history comparable using consistent keyword, engine, location, and device dimensions.
Define automation orchestration and job frequency upfront
For high-frequency tracking and large keyword volumes, favor Nightwatch and AccuRanker because their data models include scheduled checks and API-enabled project and keyword provisioning. For pull-based automation, use Ahrefs with explicit rate planning for extraction throughput because its automation is primarily pull-based rather than workflow orchestration.
Set governance expectations for RBAC, project changes, and auditability
If multiple users must manage keyword tracking safely, prioritize Moz Pro for workspace permissions that limit project changes and Rival IQ for auditable configuration updates tied to API-driven provisioning. If granular RBAC and external audit log controls are a hard requirement, account for Ahrefs and Rival IQ limits because governance depth can lag teams needing strict RBAC granularity.
Stress-test schema alignment for automated downstream merges
Before automating merges into an internal warehouse, align schemas for keyword attributes and SERP fields so attribution does not break across markets. Semrush warns that cross-project keyword overlap can complicate attribution without strict naming, while SpyFu calls for validation of schema consistency when automated merges pull competitor and ranking related datasets.
Keyword SEO tool fit by workflow control needs
Keyword SEO tools serve teams that must keep keyword targets, SERP context, and rank history consistent across reporting cycles. The best-fit selection depends on whether automation is required through API endpoints or whether export-driven workflows are sufficient.
Governance expectations also separate buyers because projects often involve multiple roles that need controlled access to tracking configurations and reporting outputs. Tools like Semrush, Moz Pro, and Nightwatch align closely with controlled project workflows and API-driven provisioning for automation needs.
SEO teams running multi-market keyword intelligence with API-driven reporting
Semrush fits because its keyword workflows connect research, SERP context, and ranking movement and it includes an API that supports scheduled refresh and bulk project updates. This design suits teams that manage keyword inventories across markets and devices and need consistent reporting outputs.
Analytics teams ingesting keyword and site audit data into internal dashboards and warehouses
Ahrefs fits because its documented API supports keyword research and site data extraction and outputs are structured enough for automated downstream reporting pipelines. Automation here is built around extraction and schema mapping rather than UI-only reporting.
Teams that need governed keyword tracking workflows with controlled project changes
Moz Pro fits because keyword rankings tracking is tied to project targets and exportable reports help standardize BI or spreadsheet workflows. Its workspace permissions limit who can change projects, which reduces operational risk.
Operational monitoring teams that require automated rank checks with repeatable time series
Nightwatch and AccuRanker fit because both support scheduled rank tracking and API-based project and keyword provisioning for automation. Their data models focus on keyword, location, and device or engine dimensions to keep comparisons stable across runs.
Competitor monitoring teams syncing keyword tracking configurations to external systems
Rival IQ fits because it provides API-driven provisioning for keyword tracking and competitive query set synchronization tied to competitor identities and content signals. SpyFu also fits competitor-centric workflows, but governance and orchestration are more export and API based than tightly controlled workflows.
Pitfalls that break automation, governance, and reporting accuracy
Keyword SEO projects fail most often when teams assume the same keyword entity naming and schema will hold across markets and projects. Semrush and other tools can require strict configuration discipline because cross-project overlap can complicate attribution and automated merges can drift.
Automation failures also happen when governance is treated as optional. Limited RBAC depth and weak auditability patterns can create operational risk when multiple users create or change tracking configurations for shared reporting targets.
Choosing UI-first keyword tools for workflows that require API automation
If internal ingestion and scheduled refresh are required, avoid relying on KWFinder and Mangools because their integration depth is mostly CSV export and UI project management with limited documented API surface. For API-first ingestion, prioritize Semrush, Ahrefs, Nightwatch, or AccuRanker because they explicitly support API-driven provisioning or extraction.
Skipping schema alignment for automated merges across markets and competitors
When automating merges into a warehouse, validate keyword and SERP field mappings because Semrush automation requires schema alignment to preserve meaning across markets. SpyFu also needs validation of data schema consistency across reports when automated merges combine competitor domain history with organic and PPC keyword datasets.
Underestimating pull-based automation rate planning
Teams that need high-frequency refresh should not assume extraction can scale without constraints. Ahrefs automation is primarily pull-based and may require rate planning for high-frequency crawls, while Nightwatch and AccuRanker emphasize scheduled checks and API provisioning that match operational monitoring cadence.
Treating governance as a UI permission issue instead of a workflow audit issue
Multi-team setups need clear controls for who can change projects and tracking configurations. If strict RBAC granularity and external audit logs are required, account for governance limitations seen in tools like Ahrefs and Rival IQ, and prefer Moz Pro for workspace permissions that limit project changes.
How We Selected and Ranked These Tools
We evaluated Semrush, Ahrefs, Moz Pro, Serpstat, KWFinder, Mangools, Rival IQ, SpyFu, Nightwatch, and AccuRanker across features, ease of use, and value, with features carrying the most weight because keyword data model consistency and integration depth directly determine reporting accuracy and automation feasibility. Ease of use and value each carry the same remaining influence so adoption friction and operational cost pressure do not dominate the final selection. Overall rating is a weighted average where features drives the outcome most often, and ease of use and value prevent overfitting to teams that only need one workflow.
Semrush set the pace because its API plus project-based keyword tracking keeps research, SERP context, and ranking movement tied together, which raised both the features and the operational fit score for teams that automate scheduled refresh and bulk project updates across multiple markets.
Frequently Asked Questions About Keyword Seo Software
Which keyword SEO tools support API-first automation for keyword research and rank monitoring?
How do Semrush and Serpstat differ in their underlying data model for keyword and SERP tracking?
What integration pattern works best for exporting keyword data into an internal data warehouse?
Do any tools provide admin-grade governance features like RBAC and audit logs for operational changes?
Which tools are better for migrating an existing keyword list into a new tracking system?
Which option best supports keyword tracking across multiple locations and devices with consistent time series?
How do Rival IQ and SpyFu approach competitor intelligence compared with ranking-only tools?
What is the practical tradeoff when choosing between project-based tracking workflows and SERP-only research tools?
Which tools support extensibility beyond basic exports, such as report automation and schema mapping into internal systems?
Conclusion
After evaluating 10 digital marketing, Semrush stands out as our overall top pick — it scored highest across our combined criteria of features, ease of use, and value, which is why it sits at #1 in the rankings above.
Use the comparison table and detailed reviews above to validate the fit against your own requirements before committing to a tool.
Tools reviewed
Primary sources checked during evaluation.
Referenced in the comparison table and product reviews above.
Keep exploring
Comparing two specific tools?
Software Alternatives
See head-to-head software comparisons with feature breakdowns, pricing, and our recommendation for each use case.
Explore software alternatives→In this category
Digital Marketing alternatives
See side-by-side comparisons of digital marketing tools and pick the right one for your stack.
Compare digital marketing tools→FOR SOFTWARE VENDORS
Not on this list? Let’s fix that.
Our best-of pages are how many teams discover and compare tools in this space. If you think your product belongs in this lineup, we’d like to hear from you—we’ll walk you through fit and what an editorial entry looks like.
Apply for a ListingWHAT THIS INCLUDES
Where buyers compare
Readers come to these pages to shortlist software—your product shows up in that moment, not in a random sidebar.
Editorial write-up
We describe your product in our own words and check the facts before anything goes live.
On-page brand presence
You appear in the roundup the same way as other tools we cover: name, positioning, and a clear next step for readers who want to learn more.
Kept up to date
We refresh lists on a regular rhythm so the category page stays useful as products and pricing change.