MuLogin Alternatives: Profile Price vs Seat Price

MuLogin prices one thing well and one thing badly, and both show up in the same table. Divide each tier by its profile allowance, then by its sub-account allowance.

Prices in USD from mulogin.com/pricing.php?l=en, read 9 October 2026. The two per-unit columns are ours, computed from the monthly figures. One navigation note that wastes people's time: /pricing.html returns a 404, and the live page is /pricing.php?l=en.

Name the unit before you divide, because that page prints two different profile numbers. Every tier advertises "Unlimited unique fingerprint profiles" alongside a capped "save up to" count of 100, 200, 500 or 3,000. Generating a fingerprint is free and unmetered; keeping one as a saved browser profile is the scarce thing you are actually buying, so the saved-profile cap is what both computed columns divide by. If you open the source and see the word unlimited, that is the free half.

Read the last two columns again. Cost per profile falls by a factor of 3.5 from Personal to Scale, which is normal and good. Cost per sub-account rises 26%, $19.80 to $24.95. Scaling profiles is rewarded, scaling the team is taxed, and that matters because bulk profile management, team sub-accounts and mobile emulation are MuLogin's three distinguishing positions. Its price card punishes two of the three.

Two constraints turn that into a budget problem.

Seats are not purchasable. The pricing page publishes no per-unit price for an extra sub-account, and none for an extra profile either. There is exactly one way to get a sixth seat, and that is moving from Solo to Team at $209. Profile count and seat count cannot be bought independently, which is unusual even here.

The $59 tier cannot be scripted. Personal gets 100 saved profiles but no REST API, no batch profile creation and no profile transfer. All three start at Solo. Personal also restricts sharing to your own sub-account, of which you have one. We confirmed that across two separate reads on 9 October 2026, because everything below rests on it. One related thing is genuinely unclear, so we're flagging rather than guessing: MuLogin documents a LocalAPI on local ports alongside the REST API, but it never appears as a per-tier row, so whether it runs on Personal we couldn't establish. Ask support before ruling the $59 tier out.

Prepay discounts of 7%, 15% and 25% at three, six and twelve months apply to the whole bill, so they change none of the ratios above. The 3-day trial is more interesting: capped at 5 saved profiles, it includes batch creation and REST API access while excluding sub-accounts, sharing and transfer, so it hands you the automation the $59 plan withholds. The pricing page carries a Free Trial button but publishes none of those terms, which live only in the help docs, so treat the shape as documented rather than guaranteed (MuLogin trial docs). Activation also runs through customer service rather than a self-serve button.

A Trustpilot score of 2.9 out of 5 from 28 reviews gets attributed to MuLogin across several third-party roundups. It isn't MuLogin's, and it isn't current either. The profile those roundups copied belongs to MoreLogin, a different company with a similar name, and on 9 October 2026 it reads 2.1 out of 5 from 34 reviews: 47% five-star, 35% one-star, 14 of them inside the last twelve months. So the number in circulation is both the wrong company and two years of reviews behind that company's own page. If MoreLogin is what you were actually shopping for, MoreLogin alternatives is the right page.

MuLogin's actual profile is trustpilot.com/review/mulogin.com: a TrustScore of 3.9 from four reviews, 75% five-star and 25% four-star, nothing at three or below, none at all in the last twelve months. The profile is unclaimed, and Trustpilot's banner notes the company hasn't invited its customers.

Four reviews supports no conclusion either way. We found no well-sourced body of reliability, refund or detection complaints about MuLogin, and we won't recycle competitor-blog claims as findings. The arithmetic below is evidence. A four-review star rating isn't.

If any part of your workflow is a script, MuLogin's entry price is $99 and the comparison changes shape.

Sources, all read 9 October 2026: AdsPower, Undetectable, GoLogin docs, Incogniton, Octo pricing and Octo auth docs. Dollar rows are USD; Octo bills in EUR excluding VAT. One Octo caveat worth a support ticket: its pricing page lists "Access to the API" on Base, Team and Advanced but not on Lite or Starter, while its auth docs state no subscription-tier restriction at all. We've printed the pricing page's answer because that is the one you pay against.

So the real spread on automation is $0 to $99. For a scripted workflow, MuLogin's $59 isn't a cheap option missing an API. It isn't an option.

One operator, no team, cheapest published plan at each volume.

Three warnings about reading that across, because the units differ. Octo prices in euros and its page states figures exclude VAT, which may be added depending on your country; we haven't converted, since any rate we picked would be stale by the time you read this.

AdsPower's dollar figures render client-side. Fetched without JavaScript on 9 October 2026, every price cell comes back as a dash placeholder, while tier structure, rate limits and discounts stay readable. Its site states paid plans start at $9 a month, and that is the only AdsPower price we'll print.

Undetectable's row needs its own unit named. Only cloud profiles carry a number on its pricing page: 5 at a time free, 50 on Base, 100 on Professional, up to 10,200 on Custom at $100 per extra thousand. Local profiles are where its two own pages disagree, so we're attributing rather than asserting. Undetectable's plan docs say "all plans allow for the creation and use of local profiles without any limitations on quantity", while across three reads of the pricing page on 9 October 2026 the comparison table printed no local-profile figure in the free column at all. Confirm that one with support before you budget against it. The free plan's published top-up is easier to check and runs the other way: $10 per 10 extra cloud profiles to a 45 ceiling, so $40 for 45 profiles against Base's $34 for 50. The category-wide arithmetic is in antidetect browser pricing compared.

Here is where the model hurts. Hold the profile requirement at 50, a number every tier here covers, and grow only headcount.

Now price the same five extra seats, the Solo-to-Team jump, on everyone else.

MuLogin's marginal seat costs 4.4 times AdsPower's, and AdsPower's arrives without 300 profiles attached. Every AdsPower tier, free included, carries one super-administrator at no charge, so the $5 applies only beyond the first person. Octo is the interesting middle: €90 buys the jump from Base to Team and six seats arrive with it, which is cheaper per seat than MuLogin, but 400 profiles come along and the page never says whether the account owner is one of the six.

Push to 20 seats and the bolting gets absurd in both directions. MuLogin's only 20-sub-account tier is Scale at $499, handing you 3,000 profiles to serve a 50-profile workload. Octo's unlimited-seat tier is Advanced at €329, handing you 100,000 for the same job, because Team stops at six. Undetectable Professional does 20 users for $69 plus 18 at $20, so $429 with the profile quota untouched, and AdsPower does it with 19 members at $5 on a plan sized for 50. GoLogin's docs publish one team member on Business, Enterprise and Custom alike, where Custom starts at $449.

Two numbers we left honest rather than filled. Undetectable's pricing page sells extra users at $20 and $15 without printing how many each plan includes; its plan docs put Professional at 2 and Custom at 5, which is what the $429 above assumes, so check your invoice against it. Incogniton's top-up price above its bundled 3 or 10 isn't published anywhere (sub-users and credential rotation covers the hygiene side). If you are shopping this exact bundled-ladder shape, VMLogin alternatives and Lalicat alternatives dissect the two other vendors that weld seats to profile count the same way.

Published plans, annual or six-month equivalents in brackets, all read 9 October 2026. Dollar figures are USD; the Octo row is EUR and excludes VAT.

Octo Browser owns the migration surface. POST /profiles/export encodes profiles into transferable strings and POST /profiles/import restores them, both capped at 100 profiles per request, and import also accepts legacy V1 files. Cookies arrive as a JSON array, as Mozilla format with raw-suffixed field names, or as Netscape text up to 16 MiB. Its API floor is Base at €79, the highest in this set. Seats it does not fix, being bolted to tiers exactly as MuLogin's are (Octo Browser alternatives).

AdsPower sells a seat as a line item, the most useful fact here if your team is growing, and its free plan ships the Local API at 120 requests a minute, no-code RPA and the Multi-Windows Synchronizer with 2 lifetime profiles. Paid API limits run 300 requests a minute on Professional, 900 on Business, 1,500 on Enterprise. Two caveats: the prices aren't in the page source, and the help centre writes the seat price as "$5" with no period attached, so confirm it's monthly before modelling twenty people (AdsPower alternatives).

Undetectable is the per-seat option for a team that already knows its profile count, since $20 or $15 a user leaves the cloud quota alone. Base is a dead end for teams: 1 user, and users cannot be added at all, so Professional at $69 is the real floor if more than one person logs in. Version 2.42.0 moved it to Chromium 144 (Undetectable Browser alternatives).

Incogniton is the cheapest API-included tier that arrives with a usable profile allowance: $29.99 for 50 profiles, against AdsPower's free 2 and GoLogin's $9 for 10. That is a third of MuLogin's $99 automation floor for a quarter of the profiles. It is not the cheapest API in this set, and nothing in the no-seats case changes that, since AdsPower free, Undetectable free and GoLogin Professional all include zero seats too. Its free plan gives 10 profiles for two months then drops to 3. We couldn't verify its bulk import or cookie formats from primary docs this pass, so don't plan a large migration into it untested (Incogniton alternatives).

GoLogin is the one to check the seat row on first. All paid plans include 2GB of residential proxy data, and free is 3 profiles with no API or cloud launches. Quote it carefully: its public pricing page and its docs disagreed on tier names and prices the same day, so the table above uses the docs (GoLogin alternatives).

If fingerprint depth rather than price sent you looking, Multilogin alternatives is the better start, and free antidetect browsers covers the free end.

MuLogin's documented bulk route out is a spreadsheet. Select profiles, use "Export cookies to Excel" to pull a template, edit it, then "Batch import cookies" to load it back, choosing whether to import cookies only or also overwrite the proxy IP information. MuLogin validates cookie format on import and states openly that it cannot validate whether the cookies still work (MuLogin cookie docs). What we could not find anywhere in its docs is a profile-definition export, in CSV, JSON or anything else, while batch profile creation is documented. Don't assume one exists until you've seen the file.

The inbound side is the opposite. Undetectable bulk-creates profiles from uploaded JSON or NETSCAPE cookie files, or from a universal format carrying name, cookies, proxy type, proxy, user agent and notes, with a free converter between JSON and Netscape. One thing to price in: mass creation is paid-plan only, and Undetectable's docs put its entry at $49 while the pricing page prices Base at $34, so confirm which number your account sees. Profiles still move into those two more easily than out of MuLogin, so switching cost is front-loaded: every profile you add while deciding is one you later rebuild by hand. One Octo cost we can't price, since no token-to-euro conversion is published: POST /profiles/export is metered at 0.5 tokens per profile, so 600 profiles burns 300 tokens.

Budget the move as a rebuild, keep MuLogin paid through the overlap, and follow the runbook in how to move antidetect browser profiles to a new tool. If your export arrives as a workbook, this converts it to Netscape files that Undetectable and Octo both accept. Check the header names against your own export first, since the labels come from your file and not from us:

# excel_cookies_to_netscape.py  -  one Netscape .txt per worksheet.
#   pip install openpyxl
#   python excel_cookies_to_netscape.py cookies.xlsx
import sys
from pathlib import Path
from openpyxl import load_workbook

# left side = what this script needs, right side = the header text in YOUR export
COLS = {"domain": "domain", "name": "name", "value": "value",
        "path": "path", "expiry": "expirationDate", "secure": "secure"}

def cookies(ws):
    header = [str(c.value).strip() if c.value else "" for c in next(ws.iter_rows(max_row=1))]
    idx = {key: header.index(label) for key, label in COLS.items() if label in header}
    missing = [k for k in COLS if k not in idx]
    if missing:
        sys.exit(f"columns not found: {missing}\nheader row was: {header}")
    for row in ws.iter_rows(min_row=2, values_only=True):
        if row[idx["domain"]]:
            yield {key: row[i] for key, i in idx.items()}

def to_line(c):
    domain = str(c["domain"])
    return "\t".join([
        domain,
        "TRUE" if domain.startswith(".") else "FALSE",   # include subdomains
        str(c["path"] or "/"),
        "TRUE" if str(c["secure"]).lower() in ("true", "1") else "FALSE",
        str(int(float(c["expiry"] or 0))),
        str(c["name"]),
        str(c["value"]),
    ])

book = load_workbook(sys.argv[1], read_only=True, data_only=True)
outdir = Path("netscape")
outdir.mkdir(exist_ok=True)
for sheet in book.worksheets:
    lines = ["# Netscape HTTP Cookie File"] + [to_line(c) for c in cookies(sheet)]
    if len(lines) > 1:
        (outdir / f"{sheet.title}.txt").write_text("\n".join(lines) + "\n", encoding="utf-8")
        print(f"{sheet.title}: {len(lines) - 1} cookies")

Cookies that expired while you were deciding are the usual cause of a migration that works, then logs everyone out (handling cookies and sessions).

The usual framing is that antidetect vendors don't sell you IPs. True, mostly, and not the interesting part at this scale. Run 500 profiles and two other things bind: whether each profile keeps the same exit for its whole life, and whether a sticky session outlasts your longest task. Neither is on anybody's price card.

The mapping has to be derivable, not remembered. If profile-to-IP lives only in the browser's proxy fields, you lose the whole table the moment you change tools, which is exactly when a platform is most likely to notice. Derive the session token from the profile ID instead:

# profile_exits.py  -  one profile, one exit, derived rather than stored.
import hashlib
import os

GATEWAY = "gateway.sparkproxy.io"
STICKY_PORT = 11002          # 11000 rotates per request, 13000 is SOCKS5
USER = os.environ["SPARKPROXY_USER"]
PASS = os.environ["SPARKPROXY_PASS"]

def session_token(profile_id: str, salt: str = "team-a-2026") -> str:
    """Stable 10-char token for a profile ID. The same ID always yields the same
    token, so the profile-to-exit mapping survives a change of browser vendor."""
    digest = hashlib.sha256(f"{salt}:{profile_id}".encode()).hexdigest()
    return digest[:10]

def proxy_url(profile_id: str) -> str:
    return f"http://{USER}-session-{session_token(profile_id)}:{PASS}@{GATEWAY}:{STICKY_PORT}"

if __name__ == "__main__":
    for pid in ["acct-0001", "acct-0002", "acct-0417"]:
        print(pid, proxy_url(pid))

The username is where the token rides, so any client that rewrites credentials silently breaks the mapping for every profile at once. Verify it rather than trusting it:

# Same token twice must return the SAME exit address.
TOK=$(python -c "from profile_exits import session_token; print(session_token('acct-0417'))")
CRED="$SPARKPROXY_USER-session-$TOK:$SPARKPROXY_PASS"

curl -s -x "http://$CRED@gateway.sparkproxy.io:11002" https://ipinfo.io/ip; echo
curl -s -x "http://$CRED@gateway.sparkproxy.io:11002" https://ipinfo.io/ip; echo

# Rotating port: a new exit per request. Correct for crawling, wrong for a login.
curl -s -x "http://$SPARKPROXY_USER:$SPARKPROXY_PASS@gateway.sparkproxy.io:11000" https://ipinfo.io/ip; echo

Your proxy bill tracks peak concurrency, not profile count. Thread-priced plans charge for simultaneous connections, so 3,000 profiles opened 200 at a time needs a few hundred threads, not 3,000 addresses:

# thread_budget.py  -  size the proxy plan from CONCURRENCY, not inventory.
PLANS = {"Starter": (75, 100), "Core": (140, 250), "Boost": (240, 500), "Plus": (440, 1000)}

def plan_for(profiles: int, open_at_once: int, headroom: float = 1.3):
    need = profiles if open_at_once >= profiles else int(open_at_once * headroom)
    for name, (price, threads) in PLANS.items():
        if threads >= need:
            return name, price, need
    return "contact sales", None, need

for profiles, batch in [(50, 50), (200, 40), (1000, 60), (3000, 200)]:
    name, price, need = plan_for(profiles, batch)
    print(f"{profiles:>5} profiles, {batch:>3} open at once -> {need:>4} threads -> {name} ${price}")

Run it and the 1,000-profile row needs 78 threads, the same plan as the 50-profile row. Only 3,000-at-200 moves up the ladder, so buying IPs per profile is the commonest way to overspend here by an order of magnitude. One rule that doesn't fit in code: a profile's token has to outlive the account, not the task, which is the opposite of how you'd size a rotation interval for crawling (how often should your IP change, what a sticky session proxy is).

Worth stating plainly, since it shapes what we'd push: SparkProxy's product is datacenter proxies and the Scraping API, no antidetect browser, which is why this page sends you to five other vendors. Our pools are USA Rotating on 50,000+ premium US datacenter IPs and Worldwide Rotating on 1M+ IPs across 80+ countries, priced by concurrent threads with unlimited bandwidth. Guarded consumer social platforms generally want residential or mobile exits, which we don't sell as endpoints you can pin a browser profile to, though the Scraping API can route its own requests through a residential premium pool. That is what proxy_type: "premium" does in the snippet below (best proxies for antidetect browsers, ISP proxies for multiple accounts).

Before committing 200 profiles to an exit country, check what the target serves from there. One Scraping API call per country costs less than finding out after the profiles exist, and it renders with headless Chromium:

# country_preflight.py  -  what does the target serve from each exit country?
import requests

API = "https://scrape.sparkproxy.io/api/v1"
KEY = "YOUR_API_KEY"   # or pass ?api_key=... , or {"api_key": "..."} in a POST body

def fetch(url: str, country: str, render_js: bool = True) -> str:
    r = requests.get(
        API,
        headers={"X-API-Key": KEY},
        params={
            "url": url,                                  # full http:// or https:// URL
            "render_js": "true" if render_js else "false",
            "country_code": country,                     # ISO 3166-1 alpha-2
            "proxy_type": "premium",                     # or "ad_free"
        },
        timeout=120,
    )
    r.raise_for_status()
    return r.text

for cc in ("DE", "GB", "SG"):
    body = fetch("https://www.sparkproxy.io/", cc)
    print(f"{cc}: {len(body):>7} chars, EUR marker present: {'EUR' in body}")

Parameters and the auth header come from the SparkProxy Scraping API docs, read 9 October 2026. The header has two documented alternatives, a ?api_key= query parameter and an api_key POST field, for callers that mangle custom headers. One detail before you grep a response: this call returns rendered HTML as the body, so 'EUR' in body matches real markup. Add json_response=true and you instead get an envelope of job_id, status_code, duration_ms, credits_used and a base64 body you must decode first. format is a different axis that only converts content (html, md, mdx, json, screenshot, pdf), and extract_rules replaces the response with an extracted object, so it can't be stacked with json_response.

1. Write down P and S. P is the profile count you'll really need in 90 days, S is how many people need their own login. Nothing else matters yet.
2. Price MuLogin from S, not P. The cheapest tier satisfying both is almost always chosen by S. At S of 6 or more you're at Team's $209 whether P is 50 or 500.
3. Price the per-seat route. Take a profile plan sized by P alone, then add seats at $5 a member on AdsPower or $20 an extra user on Undetectable Professional. Compare that total against step 2, not against MuLogin's headline.
4. Add automation. If anything gets scripted, MuLogin's floor is $99 and two competitors' floor is $0. Use the 3-day trial to run your scripts against the REST API before paying for Solo.
5. Only now compare fingerprints. If steps 2 to 4 don't separate the options, this is a detection question instead, and how to choose an antidetect browser runs the eight checks.

Two reasons some readers should stay put. Mobile emulation is MuLogin's strongest card, documented rather than implied: Android and iPhone device emulation with screen-orientation settings, plus geolocation, User-Agent and media-device fingerprint customisation, with horizontal-screen display added in version 1.0.7.5. One limit, since nothing we read settles it: don't assume iPhone emulation reaches Safari and WebKit rather than a Chromium profile wearing an iPhone User-Agent (mobile antidetect browsers for Android).

Kernel currency is the second. The changelog's newest entry is version 1.1.0.9, adding browser kernel 150, with 144, 142 and 140 earlier (MuLogin changelog). Only Chromium kernels appear there, so if you need Firefox or Gecko, MuLogin documents none. And if any machines run Windows 7 or 8.1, the notes state Chrome dropped them from kernel 110 up, pinning those users to 109 or below.