Some links are affiliate links. We only recommend networks we've tested. Read our methodology →
Head to head

Blurpath vs CoProxy.

Blurpath wins on 4 of 7 core metrics, 2 tied based on available benchmark data — our tests, independent lab reports and published specs. Last updated Jul 16, 2026.

Compared
Blurpath logo
Blurpath
3.4 ★ · Hong Kong-based proxy vendor offering 60M+ residential IPs plus ISP, datacenter, mobile and SOCKS5 proxies from ~$0.5/GB.
CoProxy logo
CoProxy
3.4 ★ · Budget UK-based proxy provider (est. 2022) offering rotating datacenter, residential and mobile IPs with HTTP/SOCKS5 from ~$1.
Rating
3.4 / 5
3.4 / 5
Trust score
7.0 / 10
7.0 / 10
Starts at
$0.50/GB
$1.00/GB
IP pool
60M+ residential IPs
90M+ residential IPs (per third-party review; unverified on official site)
Locations
190+ countries
40+ countries
Success rate
96%
95%
Avg response
1,200 ms
1,300 ms
Founded
2,022
2,020
HQ
USA
USA
Has API
✓ Yes
— No
Crypto payments
✓ Yes
✓ Yes
Browser ext.
— No
✓ Yes
24/7 support
— No
— No
Verified
✓ Yes
✓ Yes

The verdict

Blurpath wins on 4 of 7 core metrics, 2 tied. We'd pick Blurpath for most teams that need hong kong-based proxy vendor offering 60m+ residential ips plus isp, datacenter, mobile and socks5 proxies from ~$0.5/gb., but the right answer depends on your workload — read the full review of each below.

Blurpath vs CoProxy — frequently asked

Which is cheaper, Blurpath or CoProxy?

On the entry tier, Blurpath is the lower-cost option per gigabyte. Blurpath starts at $0.50/GB and CoProxy starts at $1.00/GB on residential. Both providers offer volume discounts, so the absolute cheapest tier depends on your monthly commit.

Which has a bigger IP pool, Blurpath or CoProxy?

CoProxy has the larger advertised residential pool. Blurpath reports 60M+ residential IPs across 190+ countries; CoProxy reports 90M+ residential IPs (per third-party review; unverified on official site) across 40+ countries. Pool size is one signal — actual exit-node freshness and rotation logic matter more in production.

Which is better for web scraping, Blurpath or CoProxy?

Blurpath edges ahead on overall success rate in the available benchmark data (our tests, independent lab reports and published specs). That said, the right choice depends on your target site mix — Blurpath is typically picked for ["Residential" workloads, while CoProxy is often chosen for ["Residential" use cases.

Which has better support and SLA, Blurpath or CoProxy?

Blurpath carries the higher trust score in our directory based on documented compliance, support responsiveness, and customer-base feedback. Both offer 24/7 channels at upper plans; only Blurpath gates dedicated account managers and CoProxy gates them on enterprise tiers.

Should I pick Blurpath or CoProxy in 2026?

Pick Blurpath when Hong Kong-based proxy vendor offering 60M+ residential IPs plus ISP, datacenter, mobile and SOCKS5 proxies fro. Pick CoProxy when Budget UK-based proxy provider (est. 2022) offering rotating datacenter, residential and mobile IPs with HTTP/. Most teams that consider both end up with Blurpath.

Other head-to-heads

bright data vs oxylabs bright data vs smartproxy oxylabs vs smartproxy bright data vs soax oxylabs vs iproyal smartproxy vs iproyal oxylabs vs netnut bright data vs netnut