Incogni vs DeleteMe vs Optery: Source-Checked Scope and Trade-offs (2026)
Source-checked comparison of Incogni, DeleteMe, and Optery across scope, workflow, evidence, pricing, privacy, monitoring, and renewal trade-offs. No universal outcome ranking.
Incogni, DeleteMe, and Optery use different service models. A fair comparison needs to separate provider-published scope, plan price, request handling, monitoring, reports, verification, and the information a customer must share. No headline site count proves that a particular record will be removed.
This is a dated editorial comparison, not an independent outcome study. Prices, source lists, eligibility, and plan features can change. Check the linked first-party pages before purchasing.
Quick answer
- Incogni: Its pricing page describes tier-specific automated and custom-removal workflows with recurring plan pricing. Check the current page for live scope and terms.
- DeleteMe: Its coverage, plan, and member-help pages describe a provider-managed process and privacy reports. Check the live coverage page for the current scope.
- Optery: Its pricing page describes a free tier and paid tiers with different source scopes and features. Check the current page for live counts and limits.
- OfflistMe: The catalog contains 1,034 US/global workflow profiles within a 1,052-record research catalog. That is catalog and workflow scope, not a removal-outcome guarantee.
The useful question is not “which service wins?” It is which workflow matches your need for automation, control, evidence, monitoring, privacy, and recurring cost.
Comparison framework
| Dimension | What to compare | What it does not establish |
|---|---|---|
| Price | Current plan, renewal, taxes, cancellation, and limits | That a lower price produces a better result |
| Scope | Named sources, country, plan tier, and request type | That your record exists at each source |
| Handling | Whether a provider sends requests or helps you prepare them | That a request was accepted or deletion completed |
| Monitoring | Scan cadence, re-submission, reports, and plan end | That every new listing is detected |
| Evidence | Source URL, timestamp, request copy, response, and re-check | That an internal status label equals source deletion |
| Privacy | Data collected, retention, authorization, and third-party sharing | That any service has zero exposure risk |
Incogni
Incogni’s pricing page describes plan-specific automated sources and custom removals. Because those figures use different tiers and request definitions, they should not be added together or treated as a single universal coverage number. Review the live price, country eligibility, authorization, source scope, monitoring, and renewal terms before subscribing.
Tired of dealing with data exposure?
Choose relevant provider workflows, review the generated drafts in your browser, and send or submit each request yourself. Matching, eligibility, and provider requirements still need checking.
Source: Incogni pricing.
Before subscribing, check country eligibility, authorization, the identifiers you must provide, source categories, monitoring cadence, renewal, cancellation, and what evidence appears in reports. A provider-published source count is not an independently measured removal rate.
DeleteMe
DeleteMe’s official coverage help page publishes a site count that can change. Its plans page and member-help documentation describe a managed service and privacy reports. The coverage figure is provider-published scope; it does not show how many of those sources match one person, which request route each source uses, or whether a listing remains absent after a later re-check.
Sources: DeleteMe coverage help, DeleteMe plans, and member opt-out documentation.
Check the selected plan’s current price, family or individual scope, information requirements, reports, renewal, and escalation process. Do not infer an outcome from a headline coverage figure. For a wider comparison of DeleteMe alternatives and their current plan terms, see DeleteMe alternatives in 2026.
Optery
Optery’s pricing page describes a free tier and paid tiers with different source scopes. Those are tier-specific provider figures; they do not prove that every source uses the same request method or that every person has a matching profile. Review the live price, source list, limits, and request definitions before subscribing.
Source: Optery pricing.
If visual reports or screenshots are important to you, confirm exactly what the current tier shows, how often it scans, what it re-submits, and what happens after cancellation. Keep the source URL and date for any evidence you rely on.
Side-by-side snapshot
| Service | Current source snapshot | Model to investigate | Important unknowns to verify |
|---|---|---|---|
| Incogni | Tier-specific automated and custom-removal categories on the current pricing page | Provider-managed recurring requests | Matching rules, country eligibility, reports, and renewal |
| DeleteMe | Provider-published site count on the current coverage page | Provider-managed requests and reports | Source-by-source method, plan limits, and re-check behavior |
| Optery | Different source scopes by tier on the current pricing page | Tiered scanning and removal features | Exact source list, evidence format, cadence, and plan-end behavior |
| OfflistMe | 1,034 workflow profiles; 1,052 research records | Browser-local request preparation and user-controlled sending | User-specific matches, broker response, verification, and follow-up |
This table intentionally leaves outcome fields open. A source-backed comparison is more useful when it records what is known and what still needs checking.
Which model fits which need?
A managed subscription
A managed service may fit someone who wants a provider to submit requests, perform recurring scans or re-submissions where included, and present status through provider reports. Compare the authorization and data-retention terms as carefully as the price.
A user-controlled workflow
A user-controlled workflow may fit someone who wants to review each destination and send requests from their own email account. OfflistMe prepares request guidance and drafts for the recorded workflow catalog; the user chooses, reviews, sends, and keeps the request and response evidence. It is not a provider-managed monitoring service.
A hybrid process
Some people may use a provider’s scan or report as one source of discovery and then independently verify selected destinations. That can be useful, but do not treat one provider’s report as a complete inventory. Record the exact source, date, match details, request status, and re-check result.
Verification checklist before choosing
- Open the current first-party pricing and coverage pages.
- Confirm whether the displayed count is a source count, an automated count, a custom-request allowance, or a tier-specific list.
- Read what personal information and authorization the service requires.
- Check whether the service sends requests, drafts them for you, or combines both approaches.
- Ask what evidence you receive: request copies, source URLs, timestamps, responses, screenshots, or only an internal status.
- Confirm re-submission cadence, monitoring after cancellation, renewal, refund terms, and supported countries.
- Independently re-check important sources after a reasonable provider-stated or source-specific processing period.
Frequently asked questions
Is Incogni better than DeleteMe or Optery?
There is no universal answer from the cited source pages. Incogni emphasizes tiered automated and custom source categories, DeleteMe describes a managed workflow and reports, and Optery publishes tier-specific source scopes. Choose based on the workflow, evidence, privacy terms, and source list that fit your situation.
Which service covers the most sources?
The figures are not directly comparable because providers use different definitions, tiers, and request categories. Compare the named source list and request method, not just the largest number displayed on a pricing or coverage page.
Does a provider-published count prove removal?
No. It describes claimed or documented scope. Removal evidence requires a source-specific record such as the listing URL, request date, request route, broker response, and a later re-check. Even then, a later reappearance or a separate copy may require another request.
Where does OfflistMe fit?
OfflistMe is a user-controlled workflow. Its current catalog contains 1,034 workflow profiles and a separate 1,052-record research universe with explicit evidence states and missing fields. The catalog should not be represented as 1,052 fully verified profiles. Start at OfflistMe to review the current workflow.
Sources
Reviewed August 25, 2026. The provider pages below support only the provider-stated scope, plan, workflow, report, monitoring, or renewal descriptions used in this comparison. Prices, source lists, country eligibility, request definitions, and product terms can change. This article is not a controlled outcome study, and no provider request or account action was performed.
- Incogni pricing
- DeleteMe coverage help
- DeleteMe privacy protection plans
- DeleteMe member opt-out documentation
- Optery pricing
- FTC: what to know about people-search sites
- OfflistMe Privacy Policy
Related guides
Understand your privacy rights
Where a privacy right is relevant, these plain-English explainers show what each law covers and what to verify before making a request.
Take back your privacy today
Review provider-specific routes, prepare your requests locally, and send or submit each one yourself.
Review Provider RoutesFree to review provider routes · Optional one-time unlock from $9.00 · No subscription