Oxylabs vs NetNut 2026: head-to-head comparison

i get asked about this pairing a lot, usually by people who have outgrown a cheap residential pool and are staring at two enterprise-looking websites with “contact sales” buttons. Oxylabs and NetNut both sell residential, datacenter, ISP and mobile proxies, both talk about scraping at scale, and both will happily quote you a number that is much higher than what a small operator wants to pay. the differences are real though, and they sit mostly in how the IPs are sourced and how the products are packaged.

short version of where i landed. Oxylabs is the bigger and more complete platform. it has the larger advertised residential pool, a wider product range, a scraper API layer on top, and documentation that is genuinely good. NetNut is the more focused option. its pitch is a hybrid network with ISP-sourced IPs and a flatter, more predictable relationship between plan and price, and it tends to feel simpler to get running. neither one is cheap per GB at the entry tier.

my verdict per use case: for large-scale public data collection with a team behind it, Oxylabs. for steady, sticky-session work where you want fewer moving parts, NetNut is a fair pick. for small operators who just need a few GB a month, honestly neither is the first thing i would buy, and i say why further down. everything below is based on vendor documentation, public pricing pages and my own account use, and i flag where a number is the vendor’s claim rather than something i measured.

TL;DR comparison table

	Oxylabs	NetNut
Residential pool (vendor claim)	175M+ IPs advertised	85M+ IPs advertised
Product range	residential, mobile, ISP, datacenter, plus Web Scraper API and Web Unblocker	residential, ISP, datacenter, mobile, plus scraper API products
Entry pricing	pay as you go residential is priced at a premium, discounts on monthly plans	monthly plans, with a higher entry commitment than hobby providers
Rotation	per request or sticky sessions, selectable through username parameters	rotating and static options, sticky sessions through username parameters
Geo targeting	country, state, city, ASN on residential	country and city level, ASN support depends on product
Support	24/7 live chat, account managers on larger plans	support by chat and email, account manager on enterprise plans
Docs quality	very good, large public docs site	good, smaller
Target user	data teams, agencies, companies with a procurement process	mid-size scrapers, teams that want ISP-style stability
Free trial	trial available for business accounts, check current terms	trial or money-back terms vary, check current terms

i would treat every figure in that table as a snapshot. both vendors change plan names and tiers often, so confirm on the pricing pages before you budget anything.

Oxylabs at a glance

Oxylabs is a Lithuania-founded company that has been selling proxies since around 2015. it started with datacenter IPs and grew into residential, mobile and ISP products, then added higher-level tools. the Oxylabs website lists the whole range, and the Oxylabs documentation is where i spend my time when setting something up.

what you get in practice:

a residential pool advertised at 175M+ IPs across roughly 195 countries
an authentication model with either username and password or IP whitelisting
location, session and rotation controls passed in the username string
separate dashboards for each product, which is a little clunky but clear
Web Scraper API and Web Unblocker if you would rather pay per successful result than manage proxies

what i like is that the docs are specific. parameter names, example requests and error codes are all written down. when a request fails, i can usually work out why from the docs without opening a ticket.

what i do not like is the price. the entry tier for residential is not aimed at someone buying 5GB for a side project. and the onboarding for some products involves a short form and a compliance check, which is normal for a vendor of this size but slower than a card-and-go signup.

NetNut at a glance

NetNut is an Israel-based provider that is owned by Alarum Technologies, a company listed on Nasdaq. that ownership detail is useful context, because it means there are public filings you can read if you care about the business behind the proxies. the product site is netnut.io.

its main technical pitch is the network design. NetNut describes a hybrid setup where traffic is routed through ISP-connected infrastructure and a residential peer layer, rather than leaning only on peer devices. in practice that tends to mean fewer of the random drop-offs you get from consumer devices going offline, though you should test that on your own targets rather than take my word for it.

what you get:

a residential pool advertised at 85M+ IPs, smaller than Oxylabs on paper
rotating residential, static residential (ISP) and datacenter plans
a dashboard that is simpler than the Oxylabs one
plan-based pricing with a clearer jump between tiers
support through chat and email, with named account managers on bigger contracts

what i like is that setup is quick and the product line is easier to understand. what i do not like is that the public docs are thinner than Oxylabs, and some of the more specific targeting options need a conversation with sales rather than a parameter in a URL.

Head-to-head

IP pool size

on advertised numbers Oxylabs wins comfortably: 175M+ against 85M+. but pool size is a vendor claim, and the useful question is how many distinct IPs you will actually see on your target in a month. for most scraping jobs, either pool is far larger than what a single project will touch. where the difference shows up is in narrow geos. if you need residential IPs in a mid-sized city in a smaller country, a bigger pool gives you more unique addresses before you start seeing repeats.

my take: pool size matters for hard geo targeting and for very high request volumes. for everything else it is a marketing number. Oxylabs gets the point, NetNut is not far behind in practical terms for common countries like the US, UK, Germany and Singapore.

Rotation control

both vendors let you choose between a new IP on every request and a sticky session, and both do it through parameters in the proxy username. that is the same pattern most of the industry uses, and it is simple once you have done it once.

Oxylabs documents the session ID and session time parameters clearly in its docs, and you can set rotation behaviour per request without changing your plan. NetNut offers the same idea. the difference i noticed is in the edges: Oxylabs gives you more explicit control over session duration, NetNut tends to give you a sensible default and fewer knobs.

if you like tuning, Oxylabs. if you want to set it once and leave it, NetNut is perfectly fine.

Geo coverage

Oxylabs advertises coverage in roughly 195 countries, with state, city and ASN targeting on residential. NetNut advertises 200+ countries in its marketing, with country and city targeting as the common path.

coverage on paper is similar. depth is where they split. ASN targeting is useful when you want to look like traffic from a specific ISP, and Oxylabs makes that more accessible. for Southeast Asia, which is the region i care about from Singapore, both have usable coverage in Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand and Vietnam, but city-level targeting gets patchy in smaller markets with either vendor. test your specific city before committing.

Connection success rate

this is the axis everyone wants a number for, and it is the one i trust least from any vendor, including these two. both publish success rate claims in the high 90s percent range on marketing pages. those figures depend entirely on the target, the request pattern and the headers you send. a clean API endpoint and a heavily protected retail site produce completely different results on the same proxy.

what i can say from the operator side: the cases where i saw failures were mostly caused by my own request fingerprint, not the proxy. both networks are fine for ordinary public pages. for heavily protected targets, neither plain proxy is a guarantee, which is why Oxylabs pushes Web Unblocker and NetNut has its own unblocking offering. if success rate on hard targets is your main requirement, test with a small paid trial on your actual target list and measure it yourself. i will not give you a percentage here because any percentage i gave would be a number from one target on one week.

Speed

NetNut’s network design is aimed at lower latency and steadier throughput, and on the pages i tried, the first-byte times were consistent. Oxylabs residential is also fast, but the spread between the fastest and slowest requests is wider, which is normal when the exit nodes are real consumer connections in different conditions.

datacenter is a different story. Oxylabs datacenter proxies are quick and predictable, and for pure throughput on unprotected targets they are hard to beat. ISP proxies from both vendors sit in the middle: faster and steadier than rotating residential, harder to detect than datacenter.

from Singapore, distance to the exit matters. a proxy exiting in the US adds the round trip across the Pacific on top of everything else. pick exit countries close to your target whenever you can.

Pricing per GB

pricing moves, so check the live pages: Oxylabs on its residential proxy pricing and NetNut on its own site. what has stayed consistent for me:

Oxylabs pay as you go residential carries a clear premium per GB, and the per GB rate drops as you commit to larger monthly plans
NetNut residential is sold in monthly tiers, and its entry price is not low, but the price per GB at mid tiers is competitive with Oxylabs at similar volume
both discount heavily for annual or large commitments, and both will negotiate if you talk to sales
datacenter and ISP products are priced differently, often by IP count or bandwidth, and can be much cheaper per GB of actual traffic

for a rough sense of scale, expect residential from both vendors to sit well above the budget providers that charge a few dollars per GB at small volumes. you are paying for pool quality, support and the ability to get an invoice your accountant will accept. if you only need a few GB, that premium is hard to justify. this is not financial advice, just how i think about cost per useful result.

Session persistence

sticky sessions are where residential proxies get awkward, because the exit device can disappear. both vendors let you hold the same IP for a period, and both are honest in their docs that it is best effort on rotating residential.

Oxylabs lets you set a session duration and documents the maximum. NetNut’s static residential and ISP products are better here because the IP is not tied to a consumer device, so it can be held for much longer. if your workflow needs the same IP for hours or days, for example logging into an account and staying logged in, go with ISP or static residential from either vendor rather than stretching a rotating session.

NetNut has a slight edge on stability. Oxylabs has the edge on control and documentation of the limits.

Concurrent connections

neither vendor puts a tight ceiling on concurrent connections for residential. Oxylabs handles high concurrency well and its enterprise plans are built around it. NetNut also supports high concurrency, though some plans define limits by threads or ports, so read your plan terms before you build a crawler that opens a few thousand connections at once.

in my experience the practical limit is usually your own side: your crawler, your machine, your target’s rate limiting. when a vendor does throttle you, it is usually because you hit an account level limit that support can raise. ask before you launch, not after.

Use-case verdicts

Large-scale public data collection

winner: Oxylabs. the bigger pool, better docs, ASN and city targeting, and the scraper API layer make it the better fit for teams running many targets and many geos. the premium price is easier to justify when the data is feeding a product.

Account-based work needing stable IPs

winner: NetNut, narrowly. when the job needs a consistent IP for a long session, the ISP-style network and static residential options are easier to live with. Oxylabs ISP proxies are also good, so this is a close call. if you run multiple accounts, the proxy is only one part of the stack, and antidetectreview.org covers the browser side, which usually causes more bans than the IP does.

Ad verification and price monitoring across many countries

winner: Oxylabs. wide geo coverage with city level control is the point here, and Oxylabs documents it better.

Mid-size scraping with a small team and no procurement process

winner: NetNut. simpler plans, faster to start, fewer settings to get wrong. you give up some control, but a small team often does not need it.

Who should pick Oxylabs

teams collecting data at scale who need geo precision down to city or ASN
companies that want a vendor with a compliance process and documentation they can hand to legal
anyone who would rather pay for a scraper API and skip proxy management
operators who want datacenter, ISP, mobile and residential from one account and one invoice

if you are in this group, start by reading the Oxylabs review before talking to sales, so you know which product you actually need.

Who should pick NetNut

mid-size scraping projects that want predictable monthly tiers
workflows that depend on long, stable sessions through static residential or ISP IPs
teams that value a simple dashboard over a long list of parameters
buyers who like that the parent company, Alarum Technologies, is publicly listed and files reports

the NetNut review goes through the plan tiers in more detail. also see the rest of the proxyscraping.org blog for cheaper options if you are below the volume where either of these makes sense.

Verdict overall

there is no single winner and i do not want to pretend otherwise. Oxylabs is the better platform if you have volume, a team and a need for precise targeting. NetNut is the easier, steadier option if your work leans on stable sessions and you want less to configure. on pure per GB cost at small volumes, both lose to budget providers, and that gap is the main thing a small operator should weigh.

what i would do if i were choosing today. i would take the trial or smallest plan from each, run the same list of real target URLs through both for a week, and measure success rate, median latency and cost per successful page myself. vendor claims are a starting point. your target list is the only test that counts. and remember that bans often come from the client side. if you are managing several accounts, the notes on multiaccountops.com are worth a read, since proxy choice alone will not save a sloppy setup.

one technical note for anyone newer to this: most of these services speak HTTP(S) and SOCKS5 proxy protocols, and SOCKS5 is defined in RFC 1928. if a tool of yours only supports one, check that your plan exposes it before you pay.

also, make sure what you collect and how you collect it is allowed in your jurisdiction and by the target’s terms. this is not legal or tax advice, and you should ask a professional if you are unsure.

Written by Xavier Fok

disclosure: this article may contain affiliate links. if you buy through them we may earn a commission at no extra cost to you. verdicts are independent of payouts. last reviewed by Xavier Fok on 2026-10-21.