GBP/GB
GBP/GB
(This article was updated on the 10th of October 2026)
Cheapflights.co.uk was one of the pioneers of the cheap flight comparison model. Founded in 1996 by travel journalist John Hatt it was one of the first-ever sites to attempt to list the best flight deals from hundreds of different travel providers. The site soon became extremely popular and was quickly taken over by Hugo barge and David Soskin. Under new management, the brand went from strength to strength and successfully penetrated the European market and the USA with a dedicated US domain at Cheapflights.com.
This article examines their flight search and looks at its pros and cons.
Cheapflights.co.uk has a relationship with hundreds of travel providers which provide content to Cheapflights regarding their best flight deals almost daily. Relationships range from some of the most popular airlines and travel agencies to some of the least known small flight consolidators. With so many providers listed, the number of deals published is vast. In recent times they have evolved into a fully blown search engine that is powerful and fast and includes budget carriers and established airlines in their results.
Cheapflights.co.uk has several exciting sections on their site covering everything from airport advice and travel guides to travel news and advice. They also have an excellent inspiration generator that suggests novel travel ideas based on several preferences you may have, such as being sunny or under a specific budget.
The Cheapflights.co.uk site is reasonably straightforward and uncluttered. The deals are listed very boldly, and it is easy to browse different seasons via the tabs at the top of the results.
The site is easy to navigate, and consumers can find the information they are looking for in a relatively pain-free manner.
One of the biggest complaints about Cheapflights is that many of the display prices are not accurate. You can often see a great deal listed on Cheapflights only to realise it cannot be booked at that price upon contacting the vendor. Consumers may have to visit multiple sites until they find a deal that they can book, making the process rather frustrating.
Cheapflights flights are not always the cheapest. Some other flight aggregators on the market can and do beat Cheapflights flights on occasion. Other aggregators which occasionally beat Cheapflights on price are Skyscanner, Jetcost, Kiwi, Jetradar and Kayak.
We compared 30 seperate searches covering 10 return routes from London across Cheapflights, Skyscanner and Google Flights. The message is simple: the lowest price changes by route and by the type of flight you want.
Search date: 10 October 2026.
Travel dates: 10–24 December 2026.
Passenger: 1 adult, economy, return.
Currency: British pounds (£).
Departure: London, with multiple airports included.
Three examples tell the story - For different routes a different search engine found the best deal:
Cheapflights: Found the lowest direct starting price to Dallas, £901.
Skyscanner: Found the lowest direct starting price to Tokyo, £964.
Google Flights: Found the lowest direct result to Cairo, £368.
Each table separates direct and one-stop results. Green prices mark the lowest displayed figure in that row. All figures are return fares per adult, not one-way prices.
For Cheapflights and Skyscanner, we recorded the “from” prices beside the stop categories. For Google Flights, we recorded the lowest visible round-trip result in each outbound stop category. Google Flights was filtered to “1 stop or fewer”.
These are price snapshots, not identical-flight or confirmed-booking comparisons. Airlines, airports, journey times, baggage and booking conditions can differ. Promoted advertisements and two-or-more-stop fares are excluded from the tables. A small sample of visible results cannot establish which site is cheapest overall.
EXAMPLE 1
| Result type | Cheapflights | Skyscanner | Google Flights |
|---|---|---|---|
| Direct | £1,164 | £1,157 | £1,144 |
| 1 stop | £701 | £685 | £442 |
What this means: Google Flights showed the lowest price in both categories. The one-stop figures ranged from £442 to £701: a £259 difference. However, the £442 Air Europa option took 46 hours 40 minutes outbound, including a 34-hour 5-minute stop in Madrid. The lowest price came with a substantial time trade-off.
EXAMPLE 2
| Result type | Cheapflights | Skyscanner | Google Flights |
|---|---|---|---|
| Direct | £1,036 | £964 | £1,000 |
| 1 stop | £717 | £720 | £702 |
What this means: Skyscanner showed the lowest direct fare at £964, while Google Flights showed the lowest one-stop fare at £702. The lowest-price engine changed when we changed the type of journey.
EXAMPLE 3
| Result type | Cheapflights | Skyscanner | Google Flights |
|---|---|---|---|
| Direct | £794 | £791 | £817 |
| 1 stop | £643 | £600 | £572 |
What this means: Skyscanner showed the lowest direct fare at £791. Google Flights showed the lowest one-stop fare at £572, but that Gulf Air option took 29 hours 45 minutes outbound, including a 19-hour 15-minute stop in Bahrain.
EXAMPLE 4
| Result type | Cheapflights | Skyscanner | Google Flights |
|---|---|---|---|
| Direct | £387 | £391 | £368 |
| 1 stop | £231 | £231 | £241 |
What this means: Google Flights showed the lowest direct fare at £368. Cheapflights and Skyscanner tied at £231 in the one-stop category. The Cheapflights and Google Flights connecting options were labelled as self-transfers: check the connection arrangements before booking.
EXAMPLE 5
| Result type | Cheapflights | Skyscanner | Google Flights |
|---|---|---|---|
| Direct | £901 | £926 | £918 |
| 1 stop | £875 | £644 | £876 |
What this means: Cheapflights showed the lowest direct fare at £901. Skyscanner’s one-stop category started at £644, compared with £875 on Cheapflights and £876 among Google Flights results. These are category starting prices, rather than verified quotes for an identical itinerary.
EXAMPLE 6
| Result type | Cheapflights | Skyscanner | Google Flights |
|---|---|---|---|
| Direct | Not shown | Not shown | Not shown |
| 1 stop | £815 | £815 | £806 |
What this means: No direct option was shown. Google Flights showed the lowest visible one-stop fare at £806, £9 below the one-stop starting price on both Cheapflights and Skyscanner.
EXAMPLE 7
| Result type | Cheapflights | Skyscanner | Google Flights |
|---|---|---|---|
| Direct | £64 | £65 | £66 |
| 1 stop | £88 | £92 | £74 |
What this means: Cheapflights showed the lowest direct fare at £64. The lowest one-stop result was £74 on Google Flights, so a connection was not the cheapest option overall. The £64 return used different airports: Stansted to Ciampino outbound, then Fiumicino to Luton on the return.
EXAMPLE 8
| Result type | Cheapflights | Skyscanner | Google Flights |
|---|---|---|---|
| Direct | £1,026 | £1,030 | £1,026 |
| 1 stop | £628 | £629 | £628 |
What this means: Cheapflights and Google Flights tied in both categories: £1,026 direct and £628 with one stop. Skyscanner was £4 higher for direct flights and £1 higher for one-stop flights. Sometimes the difference is small, or there is no difference at all.
EXAMPLE 9
| Result type | Cheapflights | Skyscanner | Google Flights |
|---|---|---|---|
| Direct | Not shown | Not shown | Not shown |
| 1 stop | £704 | £702 | £686 |
What this means: Google Flights showed a £686 one-stop result, compared with the category starting prices of £702 on Skyscanner and £704 on Cheapflights. Cheapflights also displayed a promoted China Southern offer at £665.
EXAMPLE 10
| Result type | Cheapflights | Skyscanner | Google Flights |
|---|---|---|---|
| Direct | Not comparable | Not shown | Not shown |
| 1 stop | £448 | £456 | £449 |
What this means: Cheapflights showed a £448 one-stop itinerary using Shanghai Hongqiao (SHA) in both directions, £1 below Google Flights and £8 below Skyscanner. The search scope differed: Cheapflights included Pudong (PVG) and Hongqiao (SHA), while Skyscanner and Google Flights searched SHA. Cheapflights’ £763 direct starting price is therefore excluded from the direct comparison.
No search engine won every route and flight category in this study. Cheapflights, Skyscanner and Google Flights each showed lower prices in different comparisons. There were ties too.
The biggest differences were not automatically the best bargains. A long layover, a self-transfer, an advertisement or a different airport can change what you are comparing. Start with the journey you actually want, then compare the price across search engines.
Use FlightsFinder to compare search engines from one search, then check the baggage allowance, both flight legs, transfer arrangements and the final price with the booking provider. Comparing gives you a better chance of finding the best price for your preferred journey.
OUR FOUNDER SAYS
“A low fare is only a good deal if the whole journey works for you. Compare several search engines, then check the stops, baggage and final booking price before you pay.”
Shahab Siddiqui
CEO and Founder, FlightsFinder.com
Cheapflights.co.uk remains one of the most popular flight comparison sites with millions of monthly users. As we have highlighted above, there are some problems with their deals on display, but occasionally they can find a bargain flight.
In conclusion, we recommend checking a few different flight comparison sites to ensure the best flight deal. Some other powerful flight comparison engines we recommend include Skyscanner, Kayak, Kiwi, Jetradar and their partner site Momondo.
To make this easy, our flight finder enables you to compare every significant search engine in seconds.
Just fill out 1 form on our homepage, and you can easily compare all of the best flight comparison sites, including prices from Skyscanner, Kayak, Momondo (which is pretty much what Cheapflights is based on) and many more.
Why not try it out now- try our flight finder
We're sure you will be glad that you did!
No. In this sample, Cheapflights showed the lowest direct starting prices to Dallas and Rome, but other sites showed lower prices on other routes. The lowest-price site can also change between direct and connecting flights.
They may display different airlines, booking providers, fare types or itineraries, and prices can update at different times. This study records the differences visible in the screenshots; it does not establish the cause of each difference.
No. A cheaper result may involve a long layover, a self-transfer, different airports or extra baggage costs. Compare the total cost and the time spent travelling, and check the connection conditions before booking.
Not necessarily. These are displayed return prices for the same travel dates, grouped by the stop information available in the screenshots. Airlines, airports and conditions may differ. Google Flights’ return-leg details were not expanded, and the Shanghai search scope differed between sites.
FlightsFinder lets you compare multiple flight search engines from one search. Check more than one set of results, choose the journey that suits you, and verify the final price and booking conditions with the provider before paying.
USD/USA
EUR/Ireland
AUD/Australia
CAD/Canada
INR/India
AED/United Arab Emirates
HKD/Hong Kong
ILS/Israel
MYR/Malaysia
NZD/New Zealand
PHP/Philippines
SAR/Saudi Arabia
SGD/Singapore
ZAR/South Africa
IDR/Indonesia