Oxylabs Alternative

No. We operate our own collection infrastructure and use commercial proxy providers as one component where appropriate — which is standard across the industry, including for providers who present themselves as fully vertically integrated.

What you buy from us is the layer above: source design, maintenance, normalisation, matching, QA and accountability. Reselling infrastructure with a markup would be a worse product than buying the infrastructure directly, and we would not blame you for choosing the direct route in that case.

Possibly not, and that is a legitimate answer. If collection is something your team wants to own, and especially if it is part of your product's differentiation, infrastructure providers serve you better than we do.

Where the conversation is still worth having: teams that own collection for their core product but are drowning in peripheral sources nobody wants to maintain. A hybrid split works well there, and we are happy to take only the peripheral half.

Fixed monthly retainer, quoted after scoping, with no per-request metering and no overage billing. Added sources or fields are handled inside the retainer rather than re-quoted.

The tradeoff is honest: usage-based billing is cheaper in quiet months and cheaper at low volume. A retainer is more predictable and includes the maintenance labour that usage-based pricing does not cover at all. Which is better depends on whether your constraint is budget variance or engineering time.

Both. An authenticated REST API with rate limits agreed to your load profile, sandbox keys for integration testing, and versioned schemas with deprecation notice before breaking changes. Or files — JSON, JSONL, CSV, Parquet — to S3, GCS, Azure, SFTP, Snowflake, BigQuery or Databricks.

Many clients use both: API for application access, scheduled files into the warehouse for analytics.

Then you should move, and we will help. You get a full historical export on request with no exit fee, and we will document the collection design so your team can rebuild it rather than starting from a blank page.

Teams do sometimes internalise collection as it becomes strategic. Making that transition painful would be a bad way to run a business, and lock-in tends to be the tactic of vendors who cannot compete on the work itself.

For managed engagements, yes — we run production pipelines across 40+ countries at high volume. But scale comparisons between the two models are misleading: infrastructure providers optimise for raw request throughput, and we optimise for validated, deliverable records.

The right question for a managed service is not maximum requests per second. It is whether we can hold a delivery schedule and quality standard at your volume, which is what the pilot and the SLA are for.