Give it the hotel, restaurant or attraction review pages you care about, choose how often it should look, and it keeps checking on that schedule. Set a threshold for what counts as a bad review and add an email if you want to be told. What comes back is a record of the monitor and its check - not the reviews themselves.
Four fields, one of which is optional. The run stores a recurring monitor and performs a first check straight away.
The email field is optional - we have runs with it left blank, and the monitor was stored just the same.
Three frequencies - once a day, once a week or once a month. A busy city restaurant earns the daily check; a seasonal attraction with a handful of reviews a year does not, and checking it daily is just spend. Weekly is the default.
The negative threshold is a number you choose rather than a fixed rule, and whatever you set is written back into the export beside the monitor - so the file records the standard that was applied, not just the outcome.
Add an email address and it goes into the monitor's record. Leave it blank and the monitor is stored anyway - we have runs both ways, and the blank ones came back with the same status as the rest.
Read this before anything else on the page. These seven are what the service declares and what every run we hold returned - and there is no review column among them.
Once a day, Once a week or Once a month. We have seen the first two in our own runs."0" on every run we hold."0" on every run we hold.Two things about this export, and the second is the one people are surprised by. First: it is a receipt, not review data. There is no reviewer, rating, title, body or date column - a run returns one row per monitor, recording the settings you chose and how the first check went. If you came here expecting the review text, this is not the export that carries it. Second: we have never seen a check come back with anything in it. On every run we hold, reviews_checked and negative_found were both "0", and the status column said the monitor had been set but the first check returned nothing, naming Tripadvisor's blocking of datacenter addresses and the need for a residential proxy. The monitor is stored either way - that part is confirmed - but we cannot tell you what a successful check looks like, because we have not held one. Everything here is a string, including both counts; the JSON adds an eighth field, position, which is a real number, while the CSV and XLSX stop at seven.
Where a schedule beats remembering to look.
A listing nobody has checked since the last complaint is the normal state of affairs. A monitor turns that into a standing job with a cadence and a written threshold, so the checking happens whether or not anyone thinks of it.
Paste one URL per line, or upload the list, and each becomes its own monitor with its own row. For a group with a dozen hotels or restaurants, that is one file describing every watch you have set rather than a dozen separate arrangements.
Because the settings are echoed back beside the result, the export doubles as a record: which listing, how often, what counted as negative, and what the check reported. That is the sort of thing worth having when someone asks why a review went unanswered.
No subscription, no minimum, no recurring bill. Your first 500 rows are on us - after that, pay-as-you-go at the same flat rate as every other service here.
Every new account, one-time. No credit card required. File upload, every frequency and every export format included - and enough to set a monitor and see for yourself what the first check reports.
The same flat rate as every other service on the platform. The pre-flight estimator shows the row count and credit cost before a run starts.
Volume pricing, dedicated workers and an SLA for watching a large estate of listings. Tell us your numbers and we will quote.
LIVESCRAPER10 at checkout.Two other standing watches. Worth comparing what each one hands back, because they do not all return the same shape.
The same idea on Trustpilot, with five frequencies rather than three. Note the difference before you assume they match: that service declares review columns - reviewer, rating, title, body - where this one declares a monitor record.
The same standing watch on a Google Maps listing, which for most local businesses is where the reviews that matter actually land.
Short answer: the listing is public - and this particular export is about your monitor rather than about anybody's review.
A Tripadvisor review page is shown to any visitor, signed in or not. No login is used and no account is touched, and the run goes through our proxy pool rather than your own address. Worth noting for this service specifically: the seven columns here describe your monitor, not a reviewer - the settings you chose and what the check reported. No person is named anywhere in this export.
That said, the reviews themselves are written by identifiable people, and anything you go on to collect or act on from a listing is a different question from the monitor record. If your workflow ends up holding review text and reviewer names, treat that as personal data under the GDPR and comparable regimes: a lawful basis, a purpose the person would reasonably expect, and no longer kept than that purpose needs.
Tripadvisor's own terms restrict automated access, so this is a terms question as well as a legal one - read them before you scale rather than relying on the pages being public. We run no third-party trackers on the data layer, and your exports auto-delete after 30 days.
The questions we hear most. Anything else? Talk to us - humans, not bots, write the answers.
Your first 500 rows are free - no card, no subscription. Enough to set a monitor and read exactly what the first check reports.
Livescraper's Tripadvisor Reviews Monitoring stores a recurring watch on a Tripadvisor listing. You submit hotel, restaurant or attraction review URLs - one per line, or uploaded as a CSV, XLSX, TXT or Parquet file - choose whether it should re-check once a day, once a week or once a month, set a threshold for what counts as a negative review, and optionally add an email for notifications. Submitting stores the monitor and runs a first check immediately, and the result downloads as CSV, Excel or JSON.
The most important thing to understand is what the export contains, because it is not what most people expect from a review service. It carries seven columns - query, frequency, email, negative_threshold, reviews_checked, negative_found and status - and there is no reviewer, rating, title, body or date among them. A run returns one row per monitor, recording the settings you chose and how the check went, rather than one row per review. That is confirmed twice over: by the column list this service publishes and by every run export we hold. It is also a real difference from our Trustpilot monitor, which declares review columns instead - so the two are not interchangeable despite the shared name.
The second thing is a limitation we would rather state than let you discover. In every run we hold, reviews_checked and negative_found both came back as the string "0", and the status column reported that the monitor had been set but the first check returned nothing, naming Tripadvisor's blocking of datacenter addresses and the need for a residential proxy. So the part we can confirm is that the monitor is stored - that is what the status says, on every run, including the ones where the email field was left blank. What we cannot do is describe a successful check, or promise you what its numbers look like, because we have never held one. Every value in the export is a string, including both counts, and the JSON adds an eighth field, position, that the CSV and XLSX do not.
On the legal side, a Tripadvisor listing is public and no login is involved, and this particular export names no person at all - the seven columns describe your monitor rather than anybody's review. The reviews themselves are written by identifiable people, though, so if your workflow goes on to hold review text and reviewer names, treat that as personal data under the GDPR and comparable regimes. Tripadvisor's own terms restrict automated access, so read them before you scale. Start free: your first 500 rows cost nothing and need no credit card, and after that it is $0.002 per row, flat.