Guest posting, blogger outreach, and what you are actually buying
You are buying a new article published on someone else's site, containing a link to yours. Three things arrive together: the placement, the article, and the link inside it. Everything else on this page — tiers, turnarounds, guarantees — is a variation on that single transaction.
The name varies; the transaction does not. Guest posting and blogger outreach are two labels for the same product, and providers title their own pages with both. FATJOE draws the one real distinction: its "ghost posts" are written to read as the blog owner's own piece with the link in the body, while a classic guest post carries the link in an author bio. Same purchase, different packaging.[1]
Three neighbours are not this product. A niche edit inserts your link into an existing, already-indexed page — faster, often cheaper, and a different purchase. Digital PR is earned coverage: a journalist writes their own story about you, so it cannot be bought as a placement; our digital PR ranking covers agencies that earn it. And a marketplace lets you browse publisher inventory and buy it yourself — more control over the exact site, but the same inventory is resold to many buyers and the vetting is yours to do.
How to judge a publisher, and why DA and DR are not enough
Domain Authority and Domain Rating are third-party estimates of link authority. They are useful for pricing a tier and useless at telling you whether real people read the site. A DR60 blog with no organic traffic is a number, not an audience.
The things that actually matter: real organic traffic and where it comes from; topical relevance at both the domain and the article level; whether the site publishes mostly paid posts; indexation and traffic history; and whether the outbound link profile looks natural.
This is not theoretical on a managed route. Loganix publishes its floors as numbers for managed placements — 1,000 monthly organic visits, 50+ referring domains, less than 50% paid posts, and a manual read of 5 to 10 recent posts — though its own pages disagree on whether self-serve marketplace inventory is pre-vetted. FATJOE publishes a traffic band per DR tier. Outreach Monks publishes the dimensions it screens — organic traffic, spam score, ad density, topical fit — but no numbers. Most providers publish neither.[1][6][10]
Learn the difference between a vendor naming a check and a vendor publishing a threshold you could hold it to. The first is marketing. The second is a standard.
What it costs, and how the engagement models differ
Three models sell this product. Per placement: Outreach Monks from $99 rising to $399 by DR tier, Rhino Rank from $75, Vazoola's published example tiers from $50 behind a demo, Loganix from $200, FATJOE from £60 billed in GBP, The HOTH from $175 across four DA/DR floors, and Stan Ventures quote-gated with a published $37–$247 per-link range at DA30–50. Package: Editorial.Link at $1,750 for five links or $6,000 for 20. Monthly programme: uSERP from $5,500 a month on a three-month minimum, Page One Power from $3,700 a month on a six-month contract.[1][3][6][9][16][21][22][26][29][31]
The spread is the lesson. The same DA-or-DR-30-ish placement sells from under $100 to over $200 across this list, and the difference is mostly what the vetting, the writing and the guarantee are worth. A cheap placement with no traffic floor and no remedy is not the same product as a dearer one with both.
The real cost drivers are the authority tier, the traffic floor, niche relevance, and whether content is included. Treat every "starting price" as the cheapest tier, not a typical order. And note what is missing: almost no provider here publishes whether its prices include tax.
How the process works, and how long it takes
The sequence is the same everywhere: order, publisher sourcing, approval where offered, content, outreach and pitch, publication, report. What differs is whether you sit in the approval step.
Published targets: Rhino Rank 7–14 days on the product page and in the terms; Stan Ventures a minimum of 20 days on its product pages with a 14-day guarantee after site approval on the homepage; FATJOE from 14 days; Loganix three weeks from approval; Outreach Monks two to three weeks; Editorial.Link's first batch within seven days of approval.[1][3][5][6][9][21][23]
Watch where the clock starts. With providers that offer approval, the timeline runs from your sign-off, not from your payment — a slow buyer, not a slow vendor, is often the real delay. And set the expectation early: the fastest option is rarely the most relevant one.
Buyer protections and placement control
Published approval, replacement, refund and reporting terms vary widely. Compare those protections alongside price and authority tiers before choosing a provider.
Site pre-approval: Stan Ventures, Editorial.Link, Vazoola on its guest-post and blogger-outreach routes, Rhino Rank if asked in advance, Loganix on its managed route, and Outreach Monks on its service page — though its Terms of Use contradict that promise and rule out refunds after publication. Content approval: Stan Ventures and Vazoola, with Loganix offering it as a $50 upgrade. Replacement cover: FATJOE for the lifetime of the link; Rhino Rank and Vazoola for 12 months; Stan Ventures states 12 months on an active recurring plan, but a sitewide footer disclaimer makes requested replacements a new billable order; Loganix, Editorial.Link, uSERP, Outreach Monks and The HOTH for six months, with The HOTH's longer cover tied to a specific tier or subscription. Non-delivery refunds: FATJOE's full refund if no relevant sites exist for your niche, and Loganix's marketplace refund FAQ. Duplicate-domain protection: FATJOE's dashboard cross-reference and Outreach Monks' unique referring domain per account. PBN exclusions are stated by FATJOE, Outreach Monks, Stan Ventures and The HOTH.[1][3][6][8][9][10][14][15][18][23][29][31]
Page One Power publishes no placement remedy at all beyond its contracted link quota — no public replacement, no public refund.[26]
Two disclosures belong here, not buried in a review. Outreach Monks' Terms of Use state "We don't provide pre-approval" and charge extra for it, which directly contradicts the approval promise on its service page. And Stan Ventures' 12-month replacement requires an active recurring plan paid within the previous 60 days, so a one-off buyer's cover is narrower than the headline suggests. A sitewide footer disclaimer makes requested replacements a new billable order.[6][8][18]
The general lesson: read the terms page, not the sales page. On this evidence the two disagree more often than they agree.
Before you buy, ask any provider five questions. Can I see and approve the exact sites before publication — and is that in your terms, or only on the sales page? Can I review and edit the article, who writes it, and how long is it? What traffic and relevance thresholds do you vet to — numbers, not adjectives? What happens if the link is removed, the site disappears, or the link turns no-follow, for how long, and under what conditions? What exactly is included in the unit price, and what is the minimum total spend?
If you resell to clients, add two more: will my report be unbranded, and will you ever contact my clients? FATJOE, Rhino Rank, Outreach Monks, Stan Ventures and Vazoola all publish unbranded reporting; Stan Ventures adds a pre-start NDA and a stated never-contact-your-clients rule.[1][3][6][17][20]
Which provider fits which buyer
A decision guide, not a re-ranking. Lowest published entry price: Stan Ventures at $37 on a quote request — or Vazoola's $50 example tier if you accept a demo-gated route, with Rhino Rank at $75. Strongest published remedy: FATJOE's lifetime replacement plus money-back guarantee. Strictest published vetting on a managed route: Loganix's numeric thresholds and manual review — its own pages conflict on whether marketplace inventory is vetted. Maximum buyer control: Stan Ventures, approving domain and article, or Editorial.Link, approving every prospect with a trial link first. Published traffic verification as the selection gate: Outreach Monks — read its terms page first. A managed programme with strategy: uSERP or Page One Power.[1][3][6][10][16][18][23][26][29]
The top three providers are closely matched, as are Page One Power and uSERP — treat each group as a close match and choose on fit.
And if what you actually want is earned coverage, no guest-post provider is the right purchase — that is digital PR.
When guest posting is the wrong purchase
If the goal is tier-one press coverage or journalist-earned links, digital PR is the better product — our digital PR ranking covers the agencies that pitch stories for editorial coverage.
If the target page already has relevant articles pointing near it, a niche edit may be cheaper: your link is inserted into an existing, already-indexed page rather than a new article.
And if you want to browse publisher inventory and buy it directly, you want a marketplace, not a managed service. The trade is self-serve control against inventory resold to many buyers, with the vetting left to you; marketplaces are a separate category and are not ranked here.
If guest posting is the wrong product
Two firms we assessed do not sell guest posts at all, and say so on their own pages. They hold no position in this ranking and no scores. They are named here because the cautious reader often wants exactly this: links nobody paid to place.
Reboot Online declines guest-post work and argues against buying guest posts on its own link-building page. It earns links by creating data-led and freedom-of-information stories and pitching them to journalists, with digital PR retainers from £3,500 per month.[33][34]
Siege Media states that it will never buy links or mentions on your behalf. Its model is content assets that attract links, plus earned digital PR, with services starting around $12,000–$15,000 per month and first links expected around month four.[35][36]
Both are a different purchase at a different price on a different timescale, and both are ranked on their own terms on our digital PR page.