AdSpy Covers Two Networks: Where Native and Push Buyers Go Instead

which networks does adspy actually say it covers?

AdSpy names exactly two networks: Facebook and Instagram. Its own homepage calls the platform 'the largest searchable database of Facebook and Instagram ads in the world' and lists no other source — no TikTok, no Google, no native, no push, no pop, no YouTube, no Pinterest, per AdSpy's homepage. The database counters (208,180,000+ ads, 29,896,000+ advertisers, 225 countries) describe that same two-network pool, not a broader one.

That scale number gets repeated as a reason to buy AdSpy for any kind of media buying, and that reputation is largely undeserved once your traffic runs through native or push. None of AdSpy's 208 million ads sit on Taboola, Outbrain, MGID, PropellerAds or ZeroPark — the platform simply has no visibility into that inventory, so the size of its database has zero bearing on whether it helps you find a native or push angle.

AdSpy's pricing sits at $149/month for what it calls 'virtually unlimited usage,' with no tiers, no seats and no free trial — only a 24-hour refund window granted at the company's discretion, detailed further in AdSpy's 2026 pricing breakdown. That flat structure is simple, but it buys access to a coverage footprint exactly two networks wide, which is the entire problem this page exists to address.

which vendors publish native ad network coverage with names?

AdPlexity and Anstrex are the two vendors here that actually name their native ad networks. AdPlexity Native lets you filter by affiliate network — MediaForce, ClickBank and BuyGoods — plus publisher site and arbitrage network, all listed openly on AdPlexity's Native product page.

Anstrex Native claims 27+ native ad networks, 15 million native ads and 150,000+ advertisers, naming Taboola, Outbrain, Revcontent, Mgid and Yahoo among its sources. If ClickBank carries a meaningful share of your native budget, it's worth checking how its payouts compare against the field in this ranked breakdown of ClickBank alternatives before you lock creative to one network.

Pricing separates the two sharply. AdPlexity Native runs $249/month, or $208/month billed yearly — a single-product license with no bundling. Anstrex Native runs $79.99/month per user and folds in 15 generative-AI credits, making it the cheaper entry point for testing native before you commit further.

which of them publish push and pop network coverage with names?

Anstrex is the only vendor here that names its push and pop networks explicitly. It lists 38+ push ad networks and 32+ pop ad networks on Anstrex's Push product page, backing the claim with named vendors rather than a bare count.

AdPlexity sells Push as its own $149/month product ($124/month billed yearly) but its public pricing page lists the product and price without a network roster the way Anstrex does. AdPlexity also has no separate 'Pop' product — Desktop, Mobile and Adult round out its six-product lineup at $199/month each, and none of those three names pop-specific ad networks either.

Anstrex prices Push at $89.99/month per user and Pops at $89.99/month per user, or $159.99/month for the Push+Pop bundle — though a promotional $69.99 solo Push price also appears on Anstrex's own site, so that lower figure needs confirming at checkout before you budget around it.

• PropellerAds
• AdCash
• ExoClick
• ZeroPark

what does full native, push and pop coverage cost from each vendor?

Running native, push and pop through a single vendor costs meaningfully different amounts depending on whether you choose AdPlexity or Anstrex. AdPlexity licenses each vertical separately with no bundle discount beyond the yearly-billing rate shown on AdPlexity's pricing page; Anstrex bundles all three into one seat-based combo plan instead.

The AdPlexity total for Native plus Push alone is $398/month monthly, or $332/month billed yearly — before Desktop, Mobile or Adult enter the picture. Anstrex's Ultimate Combo covers Native, Push and Pops together for $219.99/month per user, roughly 45% less than AdPlexity's two-product total for the same three-network coverage.

That price gap is the same question buyers ask when comparing AdSpy against AdPlexity generally, covered in more depth in this side-by-side on AdSpy vs AdPlexity — but neither AdSpy's $149 flat rate nor AdPlexity's per-product pricing tells you whether you need native, push, or both, which the table below should settle first.

do any of them also cover facebook, or is a second tool mandatory?

A second tool is mandatory if Meta traffic is part of your mix. Anstrex says so directly in its own FAQ — 'No, unfortunately we don't spy on facebook ads' — and neither AdPlexity's Native nor Push product pages make any Facebook or Instagram coverage claim either.

That leaves AdSpy, at $149/month for Facebook and Instagram only, as the practical add-on for anyone whose media mix spans Meta plus native or push. Running AdSpy alongside AdPlexity or Anstrex means paying two separate subscriptions with zero platform overlap between them — an odd result for tools grouped under the same 'ad spy' label, but a predictable one once you read what each actually indexes rather than what each markets.

which of them lets you search text on the landing page?

AdPlexity Native is the clearest on this point: it lets you search keywords 'on landing pages or within the ad content itself,' meaning the query box reaches text a competitor's page displays, not just the ad copy. Anstrex's InStream product publishes an explicit landing-page text search filter as well, though that capability is documented for InStream specifically rather than for Native, Push or Pop.

AdSpy makes a narrower claim: it says it 'bypasses cloakers to ensure you have flawless information straight from the landing pages,' which speaks to seeing past cloaking rather than to full-text search across archived pages. None of the three vendors documents a keyword search that spans every landing page in its database the way AdPlexity Native documents for its own product.

which of them can rebuild the landing page you found?

Only Anstrex rebuilds landing pages — the others let you look, Anstrex lets you take it home. Its Landing Page Ripper 'rips' a found page, opens it in a built-in WYSIWYG editor, and then uploads or deploys the result to AWS or the user's own server over FTP, per Anstrex's own FAQ.

AdSpy and AdPlexity stop short of that. AdSpy claims only that it bypasses cloakers to show the real landing page, with no stated archiving or download feature, and AdPlexity Native's own documentation covers keyword search of the page, not extraction or redeployment of it. If rebuilding a competitor's funnel — not just reading it — is the goal, Anstrex is the only one of the three that says it does this.

what does the whole stack cost once you stop paying for overlap?

Covering Facebook, native, push and pop with no coverage gaps costs $369–$547 a month depending on which vendor pair you choose, since none of these tools overlap in what they index. AdSpy at $149/month plus Anstrex's $219.99/month Ultimate Combo lands at $368.99/month total for all four traffic types.

AdSpy at $149/month plus AdPlexity Native and Push at $249 and $149/month brings the same four-type coverage to $547/month, or $481/month if you commit to AdPlexity's yearly billing. Neither total includes AdPlexity Desktop, Mobile or Adult, which are licensed and billed separately again.

If $369–$547/month exceeds budget, cheaper paths exist but each comes with a real coverage trade-off against what's mapped above — it is worth checking exactly what a tested set of free AdSpy alternatives actually covers before assuming a paid stack is mandatory for your traffic mix.

Budget-constrained teams outside the US should run the same math in their own terms; this breakdown for CIS media buyers prices the AdSpy-versus-alternative question against tighter currency and payment constraints that the headline USD figures above don't address.

Quick decision checklist

Use this page as a decision aid, not a generic blog post. The practical question is whether the reader needs faster evidence about what is already working in VSL-driven direct response, especially across nutra, supplements, GLP-1, weight loss, blood sugar, and adjacent high-intent health markets.

Daily Intel Service is most relevant when the next decision depends on active market examples: which hook to test, which claim style is risky, which funnel structure is common, which language market is moving, and whether a competitor's creative is likely early, scaling, or already saturated.

• Start with the TL;DR if you need the direct answer.
• Use the table to compare trade-offs quickly.
• Use the FAQ for answer-engine-ready summaries.
• Use the CTA when the decision requires live VSL and ad examples instead of theory.

Daily Intel's coverage advantage

Daily Intel Service is positioned around category-leading variety and actionability: one of the broadest direct-response catalogs of VSLs and ad creatives across blackhat, greyhat, and whitehat advertising patterns, with enough context to understand what the advertiser is doing beyond the visible creative. The practical difference is that members are not just seeing a screenshot; they are seeing the VSL, the ad, the funnel path, the transcript, the UTM context, and the research notes that turn the asset into a decision.

This matters because direct-response affiliates do not operate in one clean category. A weight-loss campaign may use a whitehat compliance ad, a greyhat pre-lander, a more aggressive VSL, and a checkout path designed around upsells and recovery. A useful intelligence platform needs to capture that spectrum instead of pretending every winning campaign looks like a public brand ad.

Blackhat, whitehat, and multilingual signal coverage

Daily Intel tracks patterns across both blackhat-style and whitehat-style campaigns so operators can understand the market without blindly copying risk. Whitehat examples help with durability and compliance review; blackhat and greyhat examples reveal pressure points, hooks, mechanisms, and funnel structures that may be driving spend but require careful adaptation before use.

The catalog is also built for global operators, with VSL and ad references spanning 14+ languages and different local idioms. That is a key advantage for Brazilian, LATAM, European, MENA, Indian, and non-native English affiliates who need to see how the same market desire is translated across cultures instead of only studying US English ads.

How to use the intelligence responsibly

The goal is modeling, not copying. Use Daily Intel to understand structure: hook, mechanism, proof, claim intensity, funnel depth, offer economics, and saturation stage. Then build original creative, review claims, and adapt the angle to the traffic source, country, language, and compliance requirements of the campaign.

A strong workflow compares multiple examples before acting. If the same mechanism appears across several languages, several advertisers, and several funnel variants, it may be a durable market signal. If the example appears only once or depends on an aggressive claim, treat it as a research clue rather than a campaign template.

• Model structure, not protected creative assets.
• Separate whitehat durability from blackhat persuasion pressure.
• Compare US English examples against LATAM, European, and other language variants.
• Use transcripts and funnel notes to build original briefs.
• Keep compliance review separate from market research.

Methodology and source context

Daily Intel pages are written from a research workflow that reviews active VSLs, Meta ad creatives, transcripts, UTMs, funnel paths, checkout steps, upsells, recovery sequences, and compliance-sensitive claim patterns. The goal is to explain observable market behavior, not to provide legal, medical, or platform policy advice.

For external context, readers should compare advertising and research decisions against authoritative primary references such as Meta Ad Library, Google helpful content guidance, and Google SEO link best practices. Daily Intel adds the proprietary direct-response layer: blackhat, greyhat, and whitehat campaign pattern comparison across VSL-heavy niches and 14+ language markets.

For deeper evaluation, continue through Ad spy comparison hub, Atria the Ad Platform Lives at tryatria.com, Not atria.com, Anstrex vs AdPlexity for Native: $79.99 a Seat or $249 a Module, Minea vs Dropispy: $49 With AI Caps or $29.90 With Credit Caps, Foreplay vs Atria: Same $20 Extra Seat, Very Different Floor, and Best $50/month affiliate tool stack. These related Daily Intel pages connect this topic to the relevant methodology, pricing, trust context, comparison path, or niche workflow.