Tag Inspector: pricing, alternatives and how it compares

What Tag Inspector is and who it fits

Tag Inspector is InfoTrust’s tag auditing platform; taginspector.com now redirects to its product page at infotrust.com. In October 2026 its page describes a “proprietary browser-based application” that will “Automatically inventory every tag and cookie across your websites”, including the tags other third parties load, and runs “Scalable monthly privacy audits to surface risk”, keeping the historic records as a defensible trail.

Around the inventory: consent policy management, where the team documents the data collection it expects in each region; violation details “that provide exactly what technical teams need”; remediation workflows with notes and action logs; a “Realtime PII Monitoring” feature that flags clear-text personal data collected via tags or surfaced in URLs, described as “a tag-based solution”; and the Tag Explorer Chrome extension for single-page checks.

Its page addresses Data Protection Officers and IT directors. It fits a privacy or governance team that needs a documented inventory, a policy per region, an audit history it can show a regulator, and a workflow to assign and close what the audits find.

Tag Inspector pricing: what is public

Tag Inspector does not publish prices. Its page says licenses are “purpose-built” for each site ecosystem, points to a separate license page for standard options and add-ons, and offers a free audit as the entry point. There is no public calculator, no listed plans and no stated trial length, so any figure you read elsewhere is a quote someone received, not a list price.

What is public is the model: a license per site ecosystem, with monthly audits as the unit of work. Expect the conversation to start from how many sites and regions you want audited and how often.

Where Tag Inspector is strong

• The inventory. Every tag and cookie, including the ones other vendors piggyback, catalogued against a library of thousands of known platforms.
• Policy, then audit. You write down what should load in each region and consent condition; the audit compares reality against it.
• The paper trail. Monthly audits with history, violation details, notes and action logs: what a DPO needs to show what was found and fixed.
• Consent conditions covered. Simulated visitors accept, reject, reject through Global Privacy Control, or make no choice, from the locations you select.

Where simulated audits fall short

Tag Inspector’s own FAQ says its consent auditing “leverages a scanning method to simulate users accessing various pages of your website(s).” A simulated visit covers the pages, locations and consent conditions the scan was set up with, when the audit runs. Real visitors arrive on pages the scan skipped, through campaign landings that did not exist last month, on app versions and browsers the scan did not use, and they do it every day, not once a month.

That gap is where consent breaches live: a vendor added through GTM on a Tuesday that fires before the banner until the next audit, a pixel that respects the choice on desktop and ignores it on mobile. The PII monitoring is described as tag-based; its page does not say which traffic it observes, so treat the real-traffic question as one to ask in the demo.

How Trackingplan differs

Trackingplan does not simulate visitors. One tag, SDK or server-side hook, and it reads the hits your real users send to 170+ analytics and ad providers, each with the consent state the visitor actually chose. A tag that fires before consent is caught on the first real visitor it happens to, in the market and on the device where it happened, with the GTM release that introduced it.

The compliance module, an add-on on Growth and included in Enterprise, adds PII monitoring, cookies monitoring and consent monitoring on that same traffic: personal data in a hit, cookies set without consent, vendors that ignore the choice, with GDPR, ePrivacy and CCPA-ready evidence trails. Issues arrive grouped, with a root cause, to the team responsible.

Where it stops: Trackingplan does not write your cookie declaration or your privacy policy, and it does not scan a site that has no visitors. A CMP keeps the declaration; a scanner audits the empty staging site. Trackingplan tells you what production actually does, every day.

Tag Inspector alternatives

• Same method, another vendor. ObservePoint scans pages and journeys and publishes a pricing calculator; DataTrue runs consent tests per region as a managed service with published plans; Data On Duty also covers consent monitoring and cookie audits with scheduled tests.
• The declaration and the banner. A CMP such as Cookiebot, OneTrust or Usercentrics keeps the cookie inventory and records consent; the cookie audit tools post compares them.
• A different method. Trackingplan monitors the consent state of every real hit, continuously. The table below compares the two.

For the method comparison behind privacy checks, read how to detect PII leaks in marketing tracking.