Pricing and rollout scope
VeriFalcon is still in a pilot-stage pricing posture. The practical offers today are scoped audits for static/CMS sites, migration QA, and authenticated JavaScript route coverage.
This page does not invent a polished tier table the product cannot support yet. The current model is a scoped pilot-stage audit conversation with starter anchors.
Key Takeaways
Start here, then expand detailed sections as needed.
What Pricing Means Right Now
This page does not invent a polished tier table the product cannot support yet. The current model is a scoped pilot-stage audit conversation with starter anchors.
The biggest scope variables are crawler mode, site or app size, authentication requirements, rollout environment, and whether the team needs one-off validation or an ongoing operational workflow.
A concrete pricing posture is more trustworthy than omitting pricing entirely, especially for evaluators trying to understand whether the product is real and operational.
Screens That Support This Pricing Posture
What is included in the current product scope
VeriFalcon currently supports JavaScript and static crawling, authenticated scans, live scan reporting, categorized issue views, grouped-link results, uncrawled-page visibility, and PDF or CSV exports.
Those capabilities are the basis for pilot and rollout discussions, not generic pageview-based SaaS pricing.
Current pilot packages
- Static/CMS Link Audit: from $99 for a scoped one-off crawl of a public site, docs surface, or CMS-heavy property
- Migration QA Audit: from $300 for a pre-launch, post-launch, or before/after crawl around a redesign, CMS migration, or URL move
- Authenticated JS Crawl Pilot: scoped after reviewing login flow, test-account requirements, crawl depth, and route-risk goals
What usually affects pricing or rollout effort
- whether the target is a static docs site or a JavaScript-heavy app
- whether login, permissions, or protected routes are part of the crawl
- the size and complexity of the route graph that needs validation
- whether the team wants one-off release QA or a broader repeatable workflow
Who this page is for
This page is for teams evaluating whether VeriFalcon is a fit, not for buyers expecting a finished self-serve billing catalog. If the core need is route integrity on a modern site or app, the right next step today is still a direct conversation about scope.
That is a more honest pricing posture than pretending the product is already at a mature commodity-SaaS packaging stage.
Best fit and not-best-fit for pricing conversationsCurrent pricing conversations are strongest for practical pilot rollout scope, not broad platform procurement.
- best fit: teams with defined crawl surfaces and clear ownership for route-failure remediation
- best fit: JavaScript or authenticated environments where crawl depth and issue classes drive effort
- not best fit: buyers expecting immediate self-serve tier plans and standardized enterprise packaging
- not best fit: projects where route-integrity validation is not the primary operational outcome
Operational evidence snapshot (March 29, 2026)Pricing posture is based on current product capability and deployment reality.
- two active crawl modes are live with shared categorized reporting
- report exports and grouped-link/uncrawled-page views already support technical handoff workflows
- pilot-stage support is currently direct and scope-led rather than automated plan-led
Related Pages
Continue with pages that map to adjacent use cases and comparisons.
See the clearest current pilot offer for agencies and migration projects.
See how the product is positioned and what it is built to solve.
Review the current crawl and reporting workflow before a rollout discussion.
Use the current contact page for pilot and rollout questions.