Platform Comparison
Futurepedia vs There's An AI For That: Which AI Tool Directory Should You Submit To?
Both are major AI tool directories that founders submit to for discovery, but they have different traffic profiles, audiences, and submission models. Here is how to decide where to focus.
As AI tool directories have proliferated, Futurepedia and There's An AI For That (TAAFT) emerged as two of the most prominent. Both curate AI-powered software for users looking for tools in specific categories, but they differ in audience size, submission process, and the type of traffic they deliver. For AI founders deciding where to invest time, the comparison matters.
What is Futurepedia?
Futurepedia is one of the largest AI tool directories, with approximately 2.5 million monthly visitors. It curates and categorizes AI-powered software across dozens of categories, with filters for pricing model, use case, and platform. The site features daily trending and new sections, user up-votes, and a weekly newsletter. Futurepedia has a paid submission model — getting featured quickly requires payment, though free listings exist with longer processing times.
The audience leans toward professionals, startup founders, and tech enthusiasts actively exploring AI tooling — making it valuable for B2B AI products and productivity tools.
What is There's An AI For That?
There's An AI For That (theresanaiforthat.com) is a free-to-use AI tool directory with around 500,000 monthly visitors. It curates thousands of AI tools with filters for category, pricing, and platform, and presents itself as a comprehensive database of publicly available AI tools and GPTs. TAAFT gained early visibility through viral social media posts and organic SEO around "AI for [task]" queries.
Submission is generally free, with basic listing available quickly. The site includes user reviews and a newsletter, but has less editorial curation than Futurepedia.
Head-to-head comparison
| Futurepedia | There's An AI For That | |
|---|---|---|
| Monthly visitors | ~2.5 million | ~500,000 |
| Submission model | Paid (faster) or free (slower) | Primarily free |
| Editorial curation | Higher — curated daily picks | Lower — broader database approach |
| Primary audience | Professionals, founders, tech enthusiasts | Broad — general AI tool seekers |
| Newsletter | Yes — weekly featured tools | Yes |
| Up-voting | Yes | Yes |
| Best for | B2B AI tools, productivity, high-quality products | Any AI-powered product, broader coverage |
When to prioritize Futurepedia
- You have a polished AI product ready for professional and enterprise users.
- You have budget for a paid submission and want faster visibility.
- You want newsletter feature potential — Futurepedia's weekly picks reach a large engaged audience.
- Your product fits clearly into a well-defined AI category (writing, image generation, productivity, etc.).
- You want the higher-authority backlink from a platform with strong domain metrics.
When to prioritize There's An AI For That
- You want broad coverage without a paid submission cost.
- Your product is in a niche AI category that TAAFT's database covers.
- You are building a backlink profile early and want multiple free listings.
- You want to appear in "AI for [task]" search results where TAAFT has strong organic rankings.
The practical answer
Most AI founders submit to both — the submission time for TAAFT is minimal, and Futurepedia's traffic is large enough that the paid fee is often worth it for meaningful products. The real question is sequencing: if budget is limited, start with free directories including TAAFT, get early traffic data, then decide whether Futurepedia's paid tier is justified. If you have a polished product with a clear value proposition, Futurepedia's editorial exposure can be a meaningful launch moment.
Find the right AI directories for your tool
UpStart identifies the AI directories that match your product's category and audience, and generates tailored submission copy for each platform.