Every service here searches for the details you hand over.
We find the ones you didn’t.

One email finds the phone. The phone finds the address.

You do not have to know what to look for. Neither does the thing looking you up.

1. The email address you type in

   The only thing we ask you for.

2. The phone number it is paired with in a leaked file

   A number you may not have thought of, and did not give us.

3. The home address listed against that phone

   Including addresses you moved out of years ago.

4. The names published at that address

   Yours, and often the people you live with.

Each step is found from the one before it, which is why one email is enough to start.

A search that begins and ends with the details you were able to remember cannot reach the third line, because nothing on the first line points at it.

The address at the end of a trail like that is not a guess. It is a look-up — somebody published it, and anything that can read is welcome to it. A reporter asked a chatbot for a professor’s home address. It said no, then offered a different route and produced the address, what he paid for the house, and his wife’s name. It read them off public property records. Nothing was hacked, and nothing was hidden.

A person could follow the same trail, given an afternoon and a reason to bother — and the afternoon was the only thing rationing it. That is the part that stopped being true. Researchers built a system out of four AI agents, pointed it at ordinary public posts, and measured what it cost to run. An AI agent can build a complete profile of one person for about 59 cents. It costs about 50 times less than paying a person to do it. It works about 120 times faster than a person doing the same research by hand.

We quote that research for one thing, and it is the price. It measured a machine working things out from what people had written, which is a different job from reading an address off a listing, and it shows what such a system can do — not that anybody is running one against you today. The look-up above is the easier of the two jobs, because the listing sites have already done the sorting, the indexing and the pricing. It does not have to find you interesting. It only has to find you.

Nobody can file public records away — they are public by law. What can be filed against are the people-search listings that copy those records out and republish them beside your phone number and your relatives’ names. That is the business every company in the table below is in, ours included. The link between those companies and the machines reading them is small and self-reported, but it is on the record: California now legally requires data brokers to declare whether they sold your data to an AI developer. In the state’s 2026 register, 32 of 603 said they did. Where each of these figures comes from.

Every service on this page still starts from the other end — from what you can remember to type into a form. Here is what each of them asks you for first, in their own words.

• DeleteMe

  “Submit your personal information for removal from search engines and data broker sites.”

  Their experts then search the broker and people-search sites for the details you submitted.

  joindeleteme.com · read 2026-08-11

• Incogni

  “We'll need your name, email address, and home address to help us match your profile with records in data broker databases.”

  Removal requests then go out to the brokers holding records that match what you entered.

  incogni.com · read 2026-08-11

• Optery

  “your first name, last name, city, state, and birth year to locate your profile among the millions of others out there”

  They then find and screenshot the people-search profiles built on that name.

  www.optery.com · read 2026-08-11

Quoted verbatim from each company’s own site on the date shown.

All three describe the same shape of service and it is a real one: you supply your details, they search the broker and people-search sites for them and file the removals.

We are not saying they do that badly.

We are saying the search starts from what you were able to hand over, and ours does not have to.

Prefer them one at a time? GalaxyWarden vs DeleteMe · GalaxyWarden vs Incogni · all of them side by side.

Nobody can delete a leak. Not us either.

Once a file of stolen records is out, it is copied, traded and archived, and no company on this page can pull it back.

What that file does is keep supplying the people-search sites.

They rebuild your profile from whatever source they can find, so the listing you paid to remove last year comes back and you pay to remove it again.

GalaxyWarden checks the leak side as well as the listing side.

So you can see the record that is feeding the listings and deal with what is actually fixable — change the exposed password, stop using the burned email — while we file the removals.

There is a second thing nobody here can undo, and it is the half of the AI story that gets sold wrong.

A model can also guess things about you that you never published anywhere, from nothing but the way you write.

Filing removals does not touch that, and we are not going to tell you it does.

What removal shrinks is the other half — the part somebody published, listed and sold.

Said plainly, because it matters: leaked data cannot be deleted from the internet. Anyone who tells you otherwise is lying to you. Broker listings can be removed, and we remove them. That distinction is the whole product.

So here is exactly what “we remove them” means, in order.

1. You appoint us, in writing

   One form, once. It makes us your authorized agent under California Civil Code §1798.135(c) and the equivalent laws in other states, which is what turns a request into one a company has to answer.

2. We file at 634 sites, run by 582 companies

   Among them, the 28 sites where anyone can type your name and get your address — go and check those yourself, the list is public and so is the arithmetic.

   The other 606 are the sites trading those details behind the scenes, which is where the look-up sites get them.

3. They get up to 45 days to answer

   Most comply. Some are slow. A few refuse, and no service on this page can make them. We guarantee our filing, never their decision.

4. They put you back, so we file again

   Rebuilding profiles is their business, which is why a single sweep is not a fix. Re-filing is ours, for as long as you stay.

Everyone here makes you subscribe before you can see anything.

As of July 2026, all three sell removal only as a subscription. Nothing gets filed for you until you are on a recurring plan.

DeleteMe and Incogni keep the search behind it as well — you subscribe, then they look.

Optery is the exception worth knowing about, and there is more on it further down: a free account gets you screenshots of your own listings, though removals there still start at $39/yr.

Ours runs the other way round. The scan is free, needs no card and no account, and shows you straight away, in the browser, which leaks your details are already sitting in; the full report is $9.99, one time, so you can see the whole picture before you decide whether ongoing removal is worth paying for. Removal itself is standing work — these companies rebuild the profile you cleared, which is the entire reason the filing has to keep happening — so that part is a subscription here too, and we would rather say so than sell you a single sweep that quietly goes stale.

It is backed in writing: a majority (51%+) of what your plan files in its first 14 days, or your money back — where the shortfall is for a reason within our control.

We guarantee our filing, not a broker’s decision; CCPA gives them up to 45 days.

Full terms, which govern over anything else on this site.

The table is wider than a phone screen. Scroll it sideways to see cost per site and the notes column.

Every competitor figure above is that company’s own published claim as of July 2026, taken from their pricing pages and public comparison listings.

Each company counts its own way. Treat the column as indicative, not like-for-like. We have not independently audited anyone’s coverage count.

Ours is 634 sites across 582 companies. Some companies run several sites, so one letter can clear more than one; where a company had registered twice we write once instead of twice.

Both figures are counted from our own published list on 30 July 2026, and deliberately not rounded up. You can read how we count, arithmetic included.

The column above is the site count, because that is what “cost per site” divides by. The split between the look-up sites and the companies behind them is in the list two sections up.

“Cost per site” is annual price divided by claimed automated coverage — a rough proxy, not a judgement of removal quality.

Prices change. If you spot one that has moved, tell us and we will fix it.

Run my free scan   See all plans →

Where the others beat us.

We would rather you find that here than feel misled later. A comparison page that pretends the competition has no advantages is an advertisement wearing a lab coat.

“I wrote this page myself, including the part where Incogni beats us on price. If I hid that, you would find it in ten minutes and stop believing the rest of it.”

Brandon Audeh · Founder, GalaxyWarden · penetration tester