La guía más completa de control de plagas en internet. Busca cualquier insecto, obtén su perfil completo, el pesticida exacto a usar, y cómo aplicarlo — para tu región de EE.UU.
Busca por nombre, describe lo que ves, o usa nuestra herramienta de IA. Obtén una coincidencia instantánea de 300+ perfiles de plagas.
Aprende de dónde vino, cómo se comporta, qué daño puede causar, y cuándo está más activa en tu región.
Obtén el pesticida exacto, el método de aplicación, y el tiempo adecuado — para DIY o contratar un profesional. Sin adivinar.
Haz clic en cualquier plaga para obtener su perfil completo — guía de identificación, hábitos, historia y la mejor manera de eliminarla.
Creadas para responder exactamente las preguntas que los dueños de casa buscan a las 11pm cuando encuentran algo rastreando por su cocina.
Describe lo que ves y nuestra IA identifica la plaga, explica el riesgo, y te dice exactamente cómo tratarla.
Responde 5 preguntas rápidas y te diremos si puedes manejarlo tú mismo — o cuándo es hora de llamar a un profesional.
¿Sospechas daño de termitas? Completa nuestra evaluación y obtén un estimado de severidad y los próximos pasos.
Las plagas en Florida son completamente diferentes a las de Montana. Encuentra tu región para plagas locales y calendarios estacionales.
Cada ingrediente activo explicado — qué mata, cómo funciona, si necesitas licencia, y cómo aplicarlo de forma segura.
Encuentra especialistas licenciados en control de plagas cerca de ti. Sabe qué preguntar antes de contratar — y qué red flags evitar.
Las plagas en Florida no se parecen en nada a las de Montana. Explora por región para perfiles locales, actividad estacional y empresas que sirven tu área.
Editorial sources used consistently across this site: the EPA pesticide registration database for current product use directions and active ingredient information; CDC for public health context on pest-borne disease; the National Pesticide Information Center (NPIC) for homeowner pesticide questions; university Cooperative Extension publications (UC IPM, NC State Extension, Penn State Extension, University of Florida IFAS, and others) for region-specific identification and treatment guidance; the National Pest Management Association (NPMA) for industry context; and peer-reviewed entomological literature for biology, resistance management, and emerging issues. Product reviews reflect editorial testing and aggregated user-reported outcomes rather than manufacturer-supplied claims. Where regional information matters, we link to state and local extension publications rather than generalizing across regions.
Active ingredient gets most of the attention, but formulation often determines outcome. The same active ingredient in different formulations performs very differently: microencapsulated formulations last longer on porous surfaces and reduce human re-entry exposure, wettable powders give the longest residual on porous substrates but leave visible residue, suspended concentrates give a balance of residual and appearance, dusts are uniquely effective in wall voids and dry harborage but should never be broadcast indoors, baits are appropriate when pests must transport active to the colony or nest, and aerosols are appropriate for direct contact and quick knockdown but rarely give meaningful residual. Choosing formulation by the substrate (porous vs. nonporous), the access (open spray vs. crack-and-crevice vs. void), and the goal (knockdown vs. residual vs. transferable) routinely improves outcomes more than upgrading active ingredient.
Content on this site is reviewed by Derek Giordano, a former pest control company owner and previously licensed Pest Control Operator in Florida with several years of field experience servicing thousands of regular customers. Reviews check treatment recommendations against current EPA-registered products and label use directions, cross-reference major treatment claims against university extension publications and CDC public health guidance, and verify that any product mentions reflect current registration status and reasonable consumer availability. Pages get updated as treatment recommendations evolve — pesticide products are deregistered, resistance patterns shift, regional pest distributions change. The 'Updated' date at the bottom of each page reflects the most recent review pass on that specific page; the site-wide approach to E-E-A-T (experience, expertise, authoritativeness, trustworthiness) follows Google's published guidance on health and safety topics.
This guide is one entry point in a connected library. Each pest profile, treatment guide, and tool on this site links to related references that go deeper than any single page can. Working through a pest problem effectively usually means starting with identification (so you know what you're treating), reading the species-specific treatment guide, checking the product or tool references for specific selection guidance, and confirming approach with the FAQ and troubleshooting sections. Bookmarking a few core references — the species profile, the relevant treatment guide, and one tool that supports the decision-making (product selector, cost estimator, treatment schedule) — gives you a workflow you can return to as the situation evolves. The structure is intentional: surface-level summary first, then increasing depth, with the deepest detail in the dedicated tool and reference pages.
Pest pressure varies seasonally for nearly every common pest, and treatment timing should follow that biology rather than the calendar. Early-spring treatments — before queen ants establish new colonies, before mosquito breeding sites activate, before wasp queens build nests — are more effective per dollar than mid-season reactive treatments, because they intercept the population at its smallest. Late-fall treatments target the overwintering population (rodents seeking shelter, occasional invaders like stink bugs and Asian lady beetles) and reduce the spring rebound. Mid-season treatments are reactive and inherently less efficient than preventive timing. For most regions, the high-leverage windows are mid-February through April for cold-season pre-treatments, late September through November for fall pre-treatments, and continuous monitoring through summer with treatment only when monitoring indicates active pressure.
Integrated pest management (IPM) is a structured approach to pest control developed for agricultural and commercial settings that translates well to residential use. The hierarchy: prevention first (sanitation, exclusion, habitat modification to make conditions unfavorable for pests), monitoring second (sticky monitors, visual inspection, identifying pests at low population before infestation establishes), targeted intervention third (using the least disruptive effective method against an identified pest in an identified location), and broad chemical treatment last (when targeted approaches have failed or aren't feasible). The hierarchy matters because higher-level interventions are durable and address root causes, while lower-level chemical interventions address symptoms and require repeat application. Most residential pest control reverses this hierarchy — chemical treatment first, sometimes prevention later — and produces the predictable consequence of recurring problems. Households that adopt the IPM hierarchy (often without using the term) generally describe spending less time and money on pest issues over years even though specific incidents might take more thought to address than spray-and-forget approaches.
Most homeowners frame pest control as elimination — zero individuals seen — but professional programs operate on threshold concepts that better match what's actually achievable and economically reasonable. A treatment threshold is the population level at which intervention is justified; below it, the cost and disruption of treatment outweigh the damage prevented. For aesthetic pests like the occasional ant or spider, the threshold is essentially zero only because tolerance is low, not because zero is biologically realistic. For pests with health implications (cockroaches, rodents) or property damage potential (termites, carpenter ants), thresholds are set well below visible damage to allow time for response. The implication for self-evaluation: a program that drops a cockroach population by 95% without reaching zero may be functioning correctly, and pushing for the last 5% may require disproportionate effort or treatment intensity that creates other problems. Reframing 'success' as durable reduction below threshold rather than absolute zero produces saner program design, more reasonable expectations of paid services, and less wasted DIY effort chasing the long tail of a population that's already controlled in any practical sense.
Pest control companies vary substantially in approach, training, and pricing, and the questions to ask before signing a contract often aren't the obvious ones. Worth asking: what's the technician's training and certification (state pest control certification is the floor; advanced training in IPM, structural inspection, or specific pest specialties is meaningful additional credentialing); what does the service include beyond visiting and spraying (inspection, monitoring, exclusion recommendations, follow-up scheduling); what guarantees apply if pests return between visits; what's the protocol for hard-to-resolve issues (some companies escalate to senior technicians or supervisors; others repeat the same approach); what active ingredients are used and whether the company will use specific products on request (homeowners with chemical sensitivities, pollinator gardens, or other concerns may want specific products); and what's the contract structure (per-visit, annual, multi-year). Worth less than expected: brand recognition and advertising spend (large national chains and small local operators both produce excellent and mediocre service); 'green' or 'organic' labels (which mean different things to different companies and often don't correspond to specific product or practice differences); price alone (typical pricing variance is modest, and the floor of cheap options often includes poor service).
Homeowners' associations vary widely in how they engage with pest control, and the variations create practical issues that affect individual treatment decisions. Some HOAs maintain common-area pest treatment programs that handle perimeter spraying, mosquito treatment, or rodent monitoring on shared property; others leave all pest control to individual homeowners. Some have rules about treatment products or notification requirements; others don't. Some include treatment in the HOA fee structure; others bill separately. For homeowners in HOA communities dealing with persistent pest pressure, understanding what the HOA does and doesn't do is the first step in figuring out what additional individual action is needed. For HOAs without coordinated programs in areas with significant pressure, organizing a neighborhood-level treatment plan often produces dramatically better results than individual treatment efforts that don't coordinate timing or coverage. The conversations are sometimes politically awkward in HOA contexts, but the underlying problem — that some pests are neighborhood-scale and unit-level treatment can't address them — is structural rather than personal. Bringing the issue to an HOA meeting with concrete proposals tends to produce more constructive responses than complaint-style framing.
The retail pest control aisle is largely undifferentiated by region, but pest pressure is enormously regional, and the disconnect leads to predictable purchasing mistakes. A homeowner in the Gulf Coast facing year-round subterranean termite pressure and large peridomestic cockroach populations has dramatically different needs from a homeowner in the upper Midwest facing rodent invasion in October and bed bugs in apartments. The product mix that makes sense for each is different, the level of investment that's justified is different, and the cadence of application is different. Generic shopping advice and product reviews tend to wash out these regional patterns by averaging across users. The better approach is to identify the two or three pests that actually drive pressure in your specific area, then build a product and treatment plan around those rather than around the broad category. Local cooperative extension publications, state agricultural department pest fact sheets, and regional pest control company blog content tend to be more useful sources of guidance than national review sites, precisely because they're calibrated to the conditions you're actually treating.
The quality of pest information available to homeowners varies enormously by source, and finding the reliable sources for your specific region is a one-time investment that pays off across years of pest management decisions. Cooperative extension services associated with land grant universities in each state are usually the highest-quality regional resource, producing fact sheets, identification guides, and treatment recommendations specifically calibrated to local conditions, pest species, and regulatory environments. State department of agriculture pest fact sheets are typically similar in quality and orientation. Local pest control company blog content varies in quality but can be useful when produced by experienced practitioners writing about their actual work rather than generic SEO content. National pest control sites tend to be less useful for the specific reason that they average across regions and don't address the conditions you're actually facing. Bookmarking two or three high-quality regional resources at the outset, and consulting them before making significant pest management decisions, raises the average quality of your decisions dramatically without much ongoing effort.