Overview
Summary
The useful answer before the supporting detail.
Amberscript is a European transcription and subtitling platform that combines speech-to-text software with professional human review to deliver accurate transcripts, subtitles, and translations S25. It serves businesses and professionals in media, legal, and medical fields who need reliable, secure, and accessible content S25. The platform offers a dashboard, in-browser editors, and export options, with a focus on data security and compliance S1 S25.
Product identity and positioning
Name, category, positioning, audience, and first-party claims.
- Identity: Amberscript is a transcription and subtitling platform offering AI and human services S25.
- Core purpose: It solves the problem of converting audio and video into accurate, accessible text and subtitles S25.
- Intended users: Businesses and professionals in media, legal, and medical sectors S25.
- Product scope: A web-based platform with a dashboard, editors, and API, plus separate products like Amber Notes S1 S25.
- Positioning: Europe's trusted partner for secure, high-quality transcription and subtitles S25.
- Claimed distinction: Combines AI with professional review for high accuracy and security S25.
Use cases and audiences
Who the product serves and the jobs it is designed to handle.
| Audience | Practical use case |
|---|---|
| Media companies | Localize content with subtitles, voice-over, and dubbing for global distribution S25. |
| Legal professionals | Create verbatim records for evidence and compliance S25. |
| Medical professionals | Ensure accurate record-keeping, billing, and HIPAA compliance S25. |
| Students | Enhance analysis, note-taking, and accessibility of lectures S25. |
| Corporate teams | Protect brand voice in social, e-learning, and corporate films S25. |
Traffic and search
SEO analysis
Collected Oct 22, 2026amberscript.com: an estimated 130,100 total monthly visits and about 13,091 monthly organic visits across 2,414 ranking keywords. Scout crawled 0 pages and measured a technical health score of 0/100.
Search summary
The useful answer before the supporting detail.
amberscript.com is the public website evaluated in this SEO report. amberscript.com: an estimated 130,100 total monthly visits and about 13,091 monthly organic visits across 2,414 ranking keywords. Scout crawled 0 pages and measured a technical health score of 0/100.
- Total traffic (modeled): 130,100 monthly visits across all channels.
- Organic search traffic (estimated): 13,091 monthly visits from search.
- Strongest sampled ranking: okay which one at position 1.
- Leading page in the collected evidence: https://www.amberscript.com/es/blog/ok-vs-okay/.
- Closest measured organic competitor: facebook.com, appearing 3 times in the sampled first-page SERPs.
- Technical crawl: 0 pages, health score 0/100.
Domain performance
Modeled total traffic, six-month trend, engagement, countries, and domain identity.
Total website traffic
| Month | Modeled visits |
|---|---|
| 2026-04 | 159,504 |
| 2026-05 | 145,605 |
| 2026-06 | 177,960 |
| 2026-07 | 176,170 |
| 2026-08 | 153,840 |
| 2026-09 | 130,100 |
Top visitor countries
| Country | Name | Traffic share |
|---|---|---|
| DE | Germany | 44.5% |
| NL | Netherlands | 8.3% |
| US | United States | 5.2% |
| FR | France | 4.5% |
| IT | Italy | 2.7% |
Domain identity
| Signal | Value |
|---|---|
| Registered | Jul 17, 2017 |
| Last changed | Jul 18, 2026 |
| Expires | Jul 17, 2027 |
| WHOIS server | whois.verisign-grs.com |
| DNSSEC | Not signed |
| Nameservers | BRENDA.NS.CLOUDFLARE.COM, VIN.NS.CLOUDFLARE.COM |
Website capture
Organic keywords
Top keywords and an independent Google result page.
Top organic keywords
| Keyword | Volume | CPC | Estimated value |
|---|---|---|---|
| amberscript | 3,790 | $0.50 | $2,940 |
| ok | 500,010 | $1.26 | $620 |
| amber notes | 540 | $0.00 | $310 |
| google doc | 5,703,980 | $1.64 | $250 |
| amberscribt | 230 | $0.00 | $250 |
Independent Google result page
Query: okay which one
| Position | Title | URL | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | "OK" or "okay"? Which do you prefer? I have a historical ... | https://www.facebook.com/GrammarGirl/posts/ok-or-okay-which-do-you-preferi-have-a-historical-reason-for-preferring-one-that/1071926654972958/ | "OK" or "okay"? Which do you prefer? I have a historical reason for preferring one that I'll share when I tally up your votes. |
| 2 | Difference between "OK" and "okay" | https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/25617/difference-between-ok-and-okay | While typing a post on SO, I noticed that the word "ok" (when used in the sentence "I'm still learning so it is ok") was marked as misspelled (got ... |
| 3 | Ok vs. Okay – which one is correct? | https://www.amberscript.com/en/blog/ok-vs-okay/ | Both are correct. “OK” and “okay” are interchangeable as noun, verb and adjective; pick one and stay consistent. OK came first. |
| 4 | It's one of the most common words in English, OK? But just how ... | https://www.facebook.com/CambridgeEnglish/videos/its-one-of-the-most-common-words-in-english-ok-but-just-how-well-do-you-know-how/275711843135796/ | It highlights that 'OK' is a very common word in English and provides four key phrases for using it: 'Why don't you take the bus?', 'Oh, okay', ... |
| 5 | OK | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OK | When the dialog box contains only one button, it is almost always labeled OK. When there are two buttons, they are most commonly labeled OK and Cancel. OK ... |
| 6 | Which one is correct: O.K., OK, ok, or okay? | https://lithub.com/which-one-is-correct-o-k-ok-ok-or-okay/ | As you can see, the original “O.K.” was very clearly an acronym, in this case of “oll korrect,” a popular slang misspelling of “all correct” (we ... |
| 7 | What is the difference between 'okay' and 'OK'? Is one ... | https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-okay-and-OK-Is-one-more-correct-than-the-other-And-why-would-anyone-use-OK-as-opposed-to-okay | What is the difference between "okay" and "OK"? Is one more correct than the other? And why would anyone use "OK" as opposed to "okay"? |
| 8 | OK vs. Okay | https://www.grammarly.com/blog/commonly-confused-words/ok-okay/ | Are you feeling OK or are you feeling okay? Learn about okay's history and which spelling belongs in your writing. OK? Okay! |
| 9 | OK vs Okay | https://tptranscription.co.uk/ok-vs-okay/ | Many people think OK is the shortened version of okay but OK came first. We think it is fine to use either in a written piece provided you stick to using one or ... |
| 10 | OK vs. Okay: the Great Debate : r/writing | https://www.reddit.com/r/writing/comments/n1fuc7/ok_vs_okay_the_great_debate/ | ... Okay is considered “standard” now for formal writing, with only one saying “OK” is the official version, and this blog seems to be from the UK. |
Important pages
Pages earning the most estimated search traffic in the sample.
Rank tracking
Persistent keyword baselines and position movement.
This analysis created the first position baseline at 2026-10-22T05:20:11.965Z. Movement appears after the next fresh analysis using the same location and language.
Features
Features and capabilities
Core functions and evidence-backed product capabilities.
| Capability | What it does |
|---|---|
| Automatic transcription | Generates editable transcripts with 90% accuracy, ready in about 15 minutes S25 S51. |
| Human-reviewed transcription | Professional transcribers review files for >99% accuracy S51. |
| Subtitle formatting | Automatically formats text into correct subtitle formats S1. |
| Burn-in captions | Hardcodes captions into video for platforms that don't support captions S1. |
| Translation | Provides accurate translations in over 70 languages S1. |
| Speaker identification | AI identifies and labels speakers for each paragraph S1. |
| Advanced export | Exports in formats like SRT, VTT, EBU-STL, and AI-powered summaries S51 S1. |
| In-browser editor | Allows editing transcripts and subtitles directly in the browser S1. |
Integrations and ecosystem
Connected products, exports, APIs, and workflow compatibility.
| Integration or interface | Type | What it enables |
|---|---|---|
| Speech-to-Text API | API | Allows integration with Media Asset Management tools S51 S57. |
| Google login | Integration | Enables login using Google account S1. |
| SSO | Integration | Allows login via single sign-on S51. |
| Export formats | Data portability | Exports transcripts in Word, JSON, TXT, CSV S51. |
| Subtitle export | Data portability | Exports subtitles in SRT, VTT, EBU-STL, AVID, PREMIERE S51. |
| Company Webcast | Integration | Developed speech recognition trained on political language S57. |
Pricing
Pricing and plans
Published plans, free access, trials, credits, and pricing limitations.
| Plan or offer | Verified price and billing | Included | Limits |
|---|---|---|---|
| Starter | €19/month or €190/year S51 | 5 hours per month S51 | Unused hours do not carry over S51 |
| Pro | €29/month or €290/year S51 | 10 hours per month S51 | Unused hours do not carry over S51 |
| Power | €49/month or €490/year S51 | 25 hours per month S51 | Unused hours do not carry over S51 |
| Credits | €10 per hour, one-time S51 | 1 hour; volume discounts available S51 | Activate within 60 days S51 |
| Human subtitles | From €4.40/min S51 | Not established | 18+ languages; 5 days or rush S51 |
| API | Pricing on request S51 | Integration with MAM tools S51 | Not established |
Competition
Competitive landscape
Domains competing for the same organic search demand.
Sampled competitors
| Competitor | First-page appearances | Sampled queries | Average position | Queries observed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| facebook.com | 3 | 2 | 4.7 | okay which one, como se escribe ok |
| reddit.com | 2 | 2 | 6 | okay which one, como se escribe ok |
| quora.com | 1 | 1 | 2 | okay which one |
| eltiempo.com | 1 | 1 | 2 | como se escribe ok |
| bojack.bscs.org | 1 | 1 | 3 | okay which one |
| ingles.com | 1 | 1 | 3 | como se escribe ok |
| expertiseinenglish.quora.com | 1 | 1 | 4 | okay which one |
| x.com | 1 | 1 | 4 | como se escribe ok |
| elmundo.es | 1 | 1 | 5 | como se escribe ok |
| writerscentre.com.au | 1 | 1 | 6 | okay which one |
Backlink profile
Authority and referring-domain signals.
Backlink comparison profile
- Domain rating: 65/100
- Backlinks: 45,011
- Referring domains: 3,515
- Dofollow backlinks: 64.0%
- Dofollow referring domains: 60.0%
Collection decision
The Scout search index remains intentionally excluded from automatic Scout analysis. This Scout traffic model profile costs 5 credits (0.5 cents) and is included in the first comparison run so its usefulness can be judged before the recurring collection is finalized.
AI visibility
Measured ChatGPT and Google AI mentions with cited sources.
AI-assistant referral traffic
- Estimated current generative-AI referral share: 0.4%
Scout traffic model did not return a separate AI-referral trend series for this domain.
Marketing opportunities
Actions calculated directly from the collected evidence.
| Opportunity | Recommended action | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Competitor gap | Review the sampled queries where facebook.com appears. | 3 first-page appearances across okay which one, como se escribe ok |
Trust and proof
Customers, proof, and reviews
Published proof, customer signals, and review evidence.
Independent reviews
| Platform | Page | How it was found | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Trustpilot | Amberscript Reviews / Read Customer Service Reviews of www.amberscript.com | Grounded web search | Considering 48 reviews, reviewers overwhelmingly had a great experience with this company. People consistently praise the web-based interface for being intuitive, straightforward, and easy to navigate for both beginners and experienced professionals alike. |
| La Fabrique du Net | Notre avis sur Amberscript en 2026 - Analyse & Test indépendant | Grounded web search | > « the ease of the audio player connected with the transcription is brilliant to use while sitting next to the editor. » — capterra.com - Service client réactif et accompagnement personnalisé ... - Tarification opaque et conditions d'abonnement peu claires Plusieurs utilisateurs signalent avoir découvert a posteriori des conditions de résiliation sous 3 mois non affichées sur la page de prix, ainsi qu'une facturation TVA surprise. Un utilisateur parle du "pire service client" rencontré. > « Sig |
| Transkriptor | Transkriptor vs. Amberscript: Which Transcription Tool Is Better in 2026? | Grounded web search | ### Amberscript user reviews (G2 rating: 4.4/5 / Capterra rating: 4.3/5) #### What users love: ... - “Amberscript is a handy tool for researchers. It transcribes interviews in various languages with speed and precision.” - G2 review - “Amberscript is wonderful if you want to create blogs and other content from your videos.” - Capterra review - “I know we've worked with Amberscript at work before, where it's pushed through machine translation, then gets reviewed by a person.” - Reddit user ... - |
| tl;dv | AmberScript Review 2026: I Ran It Against an Official Government Transcript | Grounded web search | AmberScript’s automatic tier averaged around a 39% word error rate across the runs of the clip. tl;dv, for comparison, scored 31.6% on the same file. Both of these numbers are inflated by the cleaned reference rather than being an absolute grade. |
| subscribed.fyi | AmberScript Reviews 2026: Details, Pricing, & Features / Subscribed.fyi | Grounded web search | ### No Reviews Yet! Be the first to share your experience and help ... 5 4 3 2 Reviews from G2, Capterra, Trustpilot 4.4 (59) 4.4 (59 Reviews) G2 Review 4.3 4.3 (43 Reviews) Capterra Review 4.3 (905 Reviews) Trustpilot Review |
| tryslicemedia.com | Amberscript: free plan, pricing and alternatives | Grounded web search | both AI and human transcription tiers and GDPR-native processing on EU ... Compiled from Amberscript’s public homepage and pricing pages, plus reviews on G2, Capterra, and Trustpilot where available. Editorial reflects our own take, written by our team. |
| agilotext.com | Amberscript avis 2026 : prix, RGPD et alternative FR | Grounded web search | plutôt qu'un compte rendu métier structuré. Agilotext est l'alternative française orientée CR personnalisable ... Sur le segment « média + recherche + municipalités », Amberscript est crédible et bien noté (4,6/5 sur Trustpilot, 4,3/5 sur Capterra). |
| designrush.com | Amberscript Reviews and Clients / DesignRush | Grounded web search | DesignRush Reviews : 4.6 (3) Reviews on Google : 4.5 (380) : 4.6 (3) : 4.5 (380) ... It does a very good job with mp3 and other compressed file formats, but I ... The service also puts up an astonishing fight against background noises like AC fans and |
| gitnux.org | Best Audio Typing Software: 2026 Comparison | Grounded web search | .6/10 Overall Features 8.4/10 Ease of Use ... .7/10 Standout feature Playback-synced transcript editing that reduces the re-listening loop during corrections. ... . Multilingual transcription helps when teams mix languages across customer calls, |
Customer proof
No named customers, testimonials, or customer case studies were found.
Independent mentions
- Transcribe voice to text — added via in-app purchases. Top up as needed.- For more ... com/en/pricing/Please visit our helpdesk for questions regarding the app, our services, or support: ... privacy-policy/Terms and conditions: https://www.amberscript.com/en/terms-and-conditions/
External links were grounded in one live web search. Search snippets are leads, not independently scraped page content; rejected links remain available in Review evidence.
Company, security, and trust
Ownership, policies, security signals, and public trust evidence.
| Signal | Finding | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Company and ownership | Not published on the collected pages. | — |
| Contact and support | Yes, we can offer you a special price for requests exceeding 100 hours. . Please contact us for further information. | source |
| Legal and privacy | We prioritizeyour data security. Our platform is GDPR compliant, ISO 27001 & 9001 certified. | source |
| Security and compliance | We prioritizeyour data security. Our platform is GDPR compliant, ISO 27001 & 9001 certified. | source |
| Uptime and status page | Not published on the collected pages. | — |
| Domain registered | 2017-07-17 | — |
| Domain expires | 2027-07-17 | — |
Not found on the collected pages: company and ownership, uptime and status page. This only means Scout did not find it on the pages it read; it says nothing about the company itself.
Documentation and product updates
Help resources, product guidance, and visible changes over time.
Not established in the collected sources.
Technical
Technical and delivery signals
Delivery model, platforms, API, data ownership, reliability claims and release activity.
| Signal | Finding | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Delivery model (cloud, self-hosted, desktop, browser extension) | Web-based platform S1. | S1 |
| Platforms and apps | Dashboard available in seven languages S1. | S1 |
| API and extensibility (API, SDK, webhooks, MCP, plugins) | Speech-to-Text API available S57. | S57 |
| Data ownership and export | Export transcripts in Word, JSON, TXT, CSV S51. | S51 |
| Performance and reliability claims | Automatic transcripts generated in about 15 minutes S51. | S51 |
| Release activity | Not published on the collected pages. | — |
Measured infrastructure
Domain, certificate, and hosting signals, measured directly.
| Signal | Finding |
|---|---|
| Domain registered | 2017-07-17 — Metaregistrar BV |
| Domain expires | 2027-07-17 |
| First archived | 2005-04-29 — web archive |
| TLS certificate | Google Trust Services, valid, expires 2027-01-11 |
| Security headers | none served |
| Headers not served | HSTS, CSP, X-Content-Type-Options, X-Frame-Options, Referrer-Policy |
| Server header | cloudflare |
| Mail handled by | aspmx.l.google.com, alt1.aspmx.l.google.com |
| Nameservers | brenda.ns.cloudflare.com, vin.ns.cloudflare.com |
Not measurable: rdap: exceeded the overall budget; wayback: exceeded the overall budget; tls: exceeded the overall budget; dns: exceeded the overall budget; headers: exceeded the overall budget. A gap here means the lookup was unavailable, not that the finding is negative.
Technical site audit
A bounded multi-page crawl with page-level issues and URLs.
Scout — Bounded technical crawl
- Pages crawled: 0 of 15 maximum
- Technical health: 0/100
- Critical issues: 0
- Warnings: 0
- Notices: 0
Issues
The bounded crawl did not detect title, description, H1, canonical, indexing, thin-content, image-alt, response-time, or duplicate-metadata issues.
Crawled pages
The website did not return crawlable HTML pages.
This is a bounded Scout crawl. Core Web Vitals and Lighthouse scores are not claimed unless a dedicated performance audit is connected.
Search Console and Analytics
First-party search and behavioral data connection state.
Modeled acquisition channels
| Channel | Estimated share |
|---|---|
| direct | 65.6% |
| search | 25.5% |
| search organic | 22.8% |
| search paid | 2.7% |
| social | 2.2% |
| social organic | 2.2% |
| social paid | 0.0% |
| referrals | 2.7% |
| paid referrals | 0.0% |
| 3.4% | |
| gen ai | 0.4% |
| affiliate | 0.3% |
| other | 0.0% |
First-party connections
| Integration | Status | Data available after connection |
|---|---|---|
| Google Search Console | Not connected | Clicks, impressions, CTR, average position, queries, pages, countries, and devices |
| Google Analytics | Not connected | Organic sessions, engagement, landing pages, conversions, geography, and devices |
No first-party Search Console or Analytics numbers are shown until the site owner authorizes the corresponding Google account. Scout traffic model values above are modeled estimates, not private analytics totals.
Limits and method
Limitations and open questions
Known constraints and missing evidence from the collected pages.
The collected pages do not mention specific competitors. Evidence gaps include lack of detailed customer reviews, specific integration documentation, and information on data export for all services. Open questions remain about the full range of API capabilities and the exact scope of the Amber Notes product.
Sources, method, and limitations
Evidence inventory, collection method, provider use, and constraints.
This report is based on 5 collected pages from amberscript.com, including features, pricing, customers, and integrations pages. The static provider was blocked, and browser rendering was unavailable; Scout traffic model completed 5 requests. External proof search was used but no verification requests were made. Pricing data was supplemented by an authoritative research source. Limitations include incomplete coverage of the site's 15 pages and lack of first-party review data.
- Official Websitehttps://amberscript.com/Verified
- Official Websitehttps://amberscript.com/featuresVerified
- Pricing Pagehttps://amberscript.com/pricingVerified
- Documentationhttps://amberscript.com/integrationsVerified
- Official Websitehttps://amberscript.com/customersVerified
- Review Sitehttps://www.trustpilot.com/review/www.amberscript.comVerified
- Review Sitehttps://www.lafabriquedunet.fr/logiciel/amberscriptVerified
- Review Sitehttps://transkriptor.com/transkriptor-vs-amberscript/Verified
- Review Sitehttps://tldv.io/blog/amberscript-review/Verified
- Review Sitehttps://subscribed.fyi/amberscript/reviews/Verified
- Review Sitehttps://tryslicemedia.com/podcast-tools/amberscriptVerified
- Articlehttps://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.amberscript&hl=enVerified
- Review Sitehttps://www.agilotext.com/blog/articles/amberscript-avis-alternative-francaise-rgpdVerified
- Review Sitehttps://www.designrush.com/agency/profile/amberscriptVerified
- Review Sitehttps://gitnux.org/best/audio-typing-software/Verified