Cookiebot and tarteaucitron can both manage consent on a website, but their models are quite different. This becomes particularly clear when looking at open source, service detection and how pricing changes when an organization operates multiple websites.
I develop tarteaucitron, so this comparison inevitably reflects my product knowledge and choices. I will therefore focus mainly on verifiable differences and explain why the two solutions do not always address the same requirements.
Cookiebot is a SaaS CMP built partly around scanning
Cookiebot scans websites to detect cookies and trackers. This scan creates an inventory and helps automate CMP configuration.
This is a common approach among SaaS CMPs: the website is crawled regularly and detected technologies can be classified for consent management.
tarteaucitron historically takes a different approach. In the open-source version, services are explicitly declared. In Pro, automatic detection operates directly within the page to recognize and block supported services.
A scanner and browser detection are therefore two different mechanisms. The former inspects a website to establish an inventory; the latter intervenes during the actual loading of a page.
Cookiebot pricing depends on the domain and its size
Cookiebot Core pricing is based notably on the number of domains and the number of subpages within each domain. The subscription tier changes according to website size.
Traffic itself is not limited. A highly visited website therefore does not change plan simply because its visitor count increases.
Domains and subdomains are considered separately. For a company operating several websites, the number of domains therefore becomes an important part of the calculation.
tarteaucitron Pro counts neither domains nor traffic
tarteaucitron Pro deliberately uses a different model. One licence can be used on an unlimited number of websites and there is no traffic quota.
The number of pages on a website does not affect the price either.
This difference matters little to someone managing a single domain. It becomes much more visible for an agency maintaining dozens of websites, a company with multiple brands or a public organization operating several portals.
I have never liked the idea of charging for every new website. An agency should not have to wonder whether adding a small client website will require another CMP licence.
Cookiebot also offers a free plan
Comparing the products simply as “free versus paid” would be misleading because Cookiebot also provides a free plan for small websites that remain within its limits.
The main difference with tarteaucitron is the nature of that free offering. tarteaucitron.js is an open-source project under the MIT licence. It can be downloaded, modified, audited and hosted independently from tarteaucitron.io.
It therefore does not exist merely as the free tier of a SaaS product. The code itself is an independently usable project.
Open source is a structural difference
This difference does not matter to everyone. Many companies simply want a working service and will never inspect their CMP’s source code.
For a developer, public organization or company that wants to audit its consent tool, open source provides something concrete.
It makes it possible to understand exactly what executes in the browser and retain a solution that can operate without depending on the Pro SaaS.
Self-hosting obviously also means maintaining the installed version yourself. This is precisely one of the differences I discuss in my comparison between tarteaucitron open source and Pro.
Two forms of automation
Cookiebot automates a significant part of the process through scanning and classification of detected technologies.
tarteaucitron Pro mainly automates blocking. When its marker loads early enough, it can recognize supported services already present on the page and intervene without requiring each tag to be manually replaced.
This distinction matters. An inventory can reveal that a tracker exists. The next problem is preventing that tracker from operating until the required consent has been obtained.
In every case, I recommend checking the result directly in the browser rather than assuming that a scanner or CMP automatically guarantees the result. DevTools can reveal which requests are actually sent.
Google Consent Mode is available on both sides
Cookiebot supports Google Consent Mode. tarteaucitron also supports it in both the open-source and Pro versions.
That feature alone is therefore not sufficient to choose between the two solutions.
Consent Mode mainly needs to be correctly integrated with the tags actually present on the website. Adding a compatible CMP without checking Google Tag Manager or GA4 configuration is not enough.
TCF creates a clearer distinction
Cookiebot participates in the TCF ecosystem, while tarteaucitron does not.
For a publisher using programmatic advertising whose partners require the framework, this difference may immediately rule out tarteaucitron.
For a website mainly controlling a few identified third-party services, it may instead provide no particular benefit.
The TCF addresses a specific requirement that I explain in my article about the IAB framework.
Cookiebot for a single website
Cookiebot’s model can be very straightforward for an organization operating one or a few websites. The size of each domain determines the plan while traffic remains unlimited.
Automatic scanning is also useful when a regularly updated inventory of cookies and trackers is required.
For organizations requiring the TCF, Cookiebot also addresses a need that tarteaucitron deliberately does not attempt to cover.
tarteaucitron for multiple websites
The difference becomes clearer as the number of websites increases. tarteaucitron Pro does not change price because a second, tenth or fiftieth domain uses the CMP.
This is particularly suited to web agencies. A single licence can cover client websites without turning every new project into another subscription.
The open-source version also provides a fully independent option when Pro automation is not required.
Price should not be the only criterion
Cookiebot and tarteaucitron ultimately illustrate two different models.
Cookiebot provides a SaaS structured around domains, website size, scanning and a set of compliance features. tarteaucitron starts with an open-source project focused on controlling services, with Pro adding automation and maintenance without website or traffic limits.
For a single website, either model can make perfect sense. As the number of domains increases, their economic differences become more significant.
But the final choice should always return to the same test: which services are present, how are they detected and does the CMP intervene early enough to control them?
