How we evaluate link building agencies

What this site is

Top SaaS Link Building Agencies is an independent comparison publisher that documents pricing, minimum commitments and contract terms for link building agencies working with B2B SaaS. We do not sell link building, we do not broker introductions for a fee, and no agency can pay to be listed, ranked, described differently or removed.

What gets an agency included

Two conditions, both of which must hold:

1. The agency works on link building for B2B SaaS as a specialism or as a named, distinct service line — not as an unlabelled component of a general marketing retainer.
2. Its details can be established from public sources we can cite and date.

There is no fee and no application requirement. We add agencies we find; agencies can also submit themselves, which changes nothing about how they are treated once listed.

What we record, and where it comes from

For each agency we record published pricing, minimum commitment, model, main link types, stated focus and any notable public fact — for example a documented campaign outcome or a stated guarantee. Every entry carries:

• A source — a URL we can link to
• An accessed date — when we last checked it
• A source type — primary where the fact comes from the agency's own published material, third-party where it comes from a roundup or research publication

Third-party sourcing is flagged because it is weaker. If you are about to spend money on the strength of a figure, confirm it directly with the agency.

What we deliberately do not publish

No scores. No star ratings. No review counts. No rankings by quality.

This is the most common question about the site, so here is the reasoning in full. Producing an honest score would require running a procurement process against every agency listed — commissioning work, auditing the placements, tracking the results over months, and doing so consistently across all twelve. We have not done that. Any number we published would therefore be assembled from impressions rather than evidence.

A five-point score that looks like a measurement but is actually an opinion is worse than no score, because readers reasonably treat it as evidence. And attaching invented ratings to real, named businesses is not a neutral act — it is unfair to the companies and misleading to the buyer.

So we publish the underlying facts instead and let you weight them against your own constraints. If budget binds, sort by published price. If you need volume, sort by model. That is a better decision process than deferring to somebody else's composite number.

How lists are ordered

Default ordering is alphabetical. Where a different order is used, the basis is stated in the table and it is always an objective field — most often whether pricing is publicly available (4 of 12 agencies). Ordering by pricing transparency is a fact about disclosure. It is not a claim that those agencies are better.

How we describe agencies

Four rules govern the language:

• We report facts and absences, never verdicts. We do not state or imply that any agency is bad, dishonest or low quality.
• “Not published” is neutral. It is a statement about public availability, not an accusation. Several agencies that publish nothing quote within a day.
• Red-flag content stays generic. Our guides describe patterns to watch for across the market. They never attach those patterns to a named agency.
• Claims are attributed. Where we describe what an agency says about itself, we say that is what it says, and link to where it says it.

Pricing data

Every price figure on this site is published third-party research with a named source — Ahrefs, BuzzStream, Siege Media, Editorial.Link and uSERP. We do not estimate, model or extrapolate prices. If a figure cannot be sourced, it does not ship.

Those figures are market reference points, not quotes. We are not paid by any of the organisations whose research we cite.

How often this is reviewed

Agency data was last checked on 2026-08-07. We aim to re-verify every entry quarterly, and immediately when someone tells us something has changed. Each profile shows its own accessed date so you can see how fresh that specific entry is.

Corrections and removals

If you represent a listed agency and something here is wrong, out of date, or misleading, tell us and we will verify and fix it. We will correct factual errors regardless of who reports them.

We will also remove an entry on request from the agency it describes. We would rather list fewer agencies accurately than argue about whether a company wants to be documented.

What we will not do is change an accurate entry because it is unflattering, or add favourable framing in exchange for anything. Submit a correction.

What we have no data on

Stated plainly, because the absences matter as much as the entries:

• We have not verified any agency's client results independently.
• We have not audited any agency's placements for quality.
• We hold no customer satisfaction data, because we have collected none.
• We cannot tell you which agency will do the best job for you. Nobody can, from a webpage. What we can do is make sure you walk into the conversation knowing the market rate and the right questions.

Our commercial model is set out in full on the disclosure page.