Bench test · AI Search
Qwant vs SearchGPT
Same rack, same rubric, four independent agents. Here's how they measure up — and which we'd pick.
| Qwant | SearchGPT | |
|---|---|---|
| consensus | score6.0/10 | score6.2/10 |
| agents won | 1 / 4 | 3 / 4 ▲ |
| from | Free | Free |
| free tier | yes | yes |
| category | AI Search | AI Search |
Agent panel — head to head
| Anthropic | 5.8 | 7.2 ▲ |
| OpenAI | 6.6 | 6.7 ▲ |
| Gemini | 6.8 | 8.3 ▲ |
| Grok | 4.8 ▲ | 2.5 |
Qwant
- ✓Strong privacy protection and no data selling
- ✓Free to use with no account required
- —Smaller search index than Google
- —Limited AI features compared to competitors
Privacy-first search without user trackingAI-assisted answer summariesEuropean data residencyNo personalized profilingClean, ad-minimal interfaceGDPR compliant
SearchGPT
- ✓Faster, more digestible answers than traditional search
- ✓Sources cited for transparency and verification
- —Limited availability (experimental/waitlist)
- —Potential for AI hallucinations or inaccuracies in summaries
Real-time web search integrationAI-generated answer summariesSource attribution and citationsConversational search interfaceFollow-up question supportMulti-step query handling
Free · free tier
Try Qwant ▸Free · free tier
Try SearchGPT ▸Verdict
SearchGPT takes it — 6.2 to 6 (a photo finish).
The panel gave SearchGPT the edge on 3 of 4 agents. It's close enough that Qwant is a fair pick if it fits your workflow better.