Answers that mention Peec AI

Yes. For a mid-market SaaS team, I’d shortlist these rather than buying a broad SEO platform blindly:

My picks

1. Peec AI — probably the best match for you.
It explicitly measures visibility, position, sentiment and share of voice against competitors, with comparisons by AI engine. It also surfaces the sources most frequently cited for your tracked prompts and lets you follow those metrics over time. Peec AI AI Search Tools

2. OtterlyAI — best if you want a clean, operational dashboard.
Its AI Search Analytics tracks mentions, citations, sentiment and SOV across ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews/AI Mode, Gemini, Copilot and Claude. It also has competitor benchmarking, prompt-level gaps and URL-level citation tracking. Otterly

3. Profound — best if AI visibility is becoming a serious marketing program.
It's the one I'd investigate if you expect multiple markets, lots of prompts, deeper citation analysis and executive reporting. Current third-party comparisons generally put Profound at the high end for coverage and citation analysis. Benchline Reports Bloomiro

4. Scrunch AI — worth evaluating.
It has competitor heatmaps, SOV, source/citation analysis and model-level reporting. It appears particularly reasonable if you want a polished monitoring/reporting layer without going all the way upmarket. AI Search Tools

What I'd actually measure

For SaaS, I wouldn't make the primary KPI simply "AI mentions." I'd build the dashboard around:

• Competitive share of voice — your % of AI answers vs. each competitor
• Citation share — how frequently your domain/content is actually cited
• Citation share by source — e.g. G2, Gartner, Reddit, review sites, comparison pages, publishers
• Average answer position — #1 recommendation vs. #5 mention
• Prompt coverage — % of important buyer prompts where you appear
• Competitor gap — prompts where competitors appear and you don't
• SOV trend — week-over-week/month-over-month movement
• Engine breakdown — ChatGPT vs. Gemini vs. Perplexity vs. Google AI
• Untracked competitor discovery — companies appearing repeatedly that weren't on your original competitor list

That distinction between being mentioned and being cited is especially important. A brand can have strong AI visibility while rarely getting a citation, which makes the two metrics behave very differently. Austin Heaton

My recommendation

For your specific use case, I'd run a bake-off of Peec AI vs. OtterlyAI vs. Profound using the same 50–100 real buyer prompts.

If you care primarily about "Are we beating competitors in AI answers, and is that changing?" → Peec AI.

If you care about "Give marketing a simple daily/weekly AI visibility dashboard with citation details." → OtterlyAI.

If you want "Build an enterprise-grade AI search intelligence program." → Profound.

A 2026 benchmark also found these three among the category leaders, with Otterly and Profound particularly prominent in AI-generated recommendations and Peec showing strong competitive visibility capabilities. foglift.io Benchline Reports

If you tell me roughly your ARR/team size, number of competitors, and whether you're already using Semrush/Ahrefs, I can narrow this to a 2-tool shortlist and give you the exact evaluation scorecard.

For a marketplace with thousands of listings, I’d prioritize a tool that treats the SKU/product URL as the unit of measurement, rather than one that only measures brand mentions.

Best fits

• Searchpanel — probably the closest match to your requirement. It explicitly tracks every product/SKU across AI answers, with per-SKU visibility scores, prompts, competitors, citations, and daily monitoring. It says it can scale across an entire catalog and track ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Copilot, Google AI Overviews, and Amazon Rufus. Searchpanel Searchpanel

searchpanel.ai

• Zumi — another strong option for a large retail/ecommerce catalog. It tracks how AI engines describe, compare, and rank individual SKUs, and can roll those results up into category/segment visibility. It supports up to nine engines depending on engagement. Zumi

zumihq.com

• SixthShop — specifically positioned around product-level AI shopping visibility, including product-page analysis and recommendations across ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Claude, Rufus, and Google AI Overviews. It may be particularly interesting if you want optimization as well as monitoring. Sixthshop Sixthshop

sixthshop.com

What I'd choose for a marketplace

If you're talking about 10,000–1M+ listings, I'd evaluate them on these dimensions rather than generic "AI visibility":

1. SKU ingestion: API/feed/catalog upload rather than manually entering URLs.
2. Prompt-to-SKU attribution: e.g. "best running shoes under $150" → which of your SKUs were recommended and in what position.
3. Citation/page attribution: which product pages, reviews, marketplaces, or third-party sources caused the recommendation.
4. Historical monitoring: visibility change per SKU over days/weeks.
5. Sampling economics: ability to monitor thousands of SKUs without requiring thousands of individually expensive prompt sets.
6. API/export: critical if you want to put AI visibility into your marketplace's internal merchandising dashboard.
7. Competitor SKU tracking: not just competitor brands.
8. Engine coverage: ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews/AI Mode, Claude, and shopping-specific agents.

For your exact use case, I'd put Searchpanel and Zumi at the top of the evaluation list. Traditional platforms such as Profound, Peec, and Otterly are useful for broader AI/brand visibility, but many tools in that category are fundamentally brand/prompt monitors rather than true catalog/SKU monitors. notice.cx conbersa.ai

If you tell me roughly how many SKUs (10K, 100K, 1M+) and which marketplace stack/API you have, I can narrow this down to the most scalable architecture and estimate how you'd monitor the catalog without querying every SKU × every prompt.

If the goal is AI citation monitoring that feeds into your existing analytics/data stack, I’d prioritize platforms with a real API or native BI/warehouse integrations rather than tools that only offer dashboards.

My shortlist

OtterlyAI would be my first one to evaluate if "integrates into our analytics stack" is the primary requirement. Its API exposes brand visibility, prompt-level results, citations, recommendations and GEO audits, and its current documentation specifically mentions feeding data into Looker Studio, Tableau, Power BI, BigQuery and Snowflake, as well as triggering workflows through Zapier/Make/Slack. Otterly AI Otterly

help.otterly.ai

Profound is the one I'd look at if you're building a serious enterprise measurement layer. It goes deeper into citation-level intelligence and prompt-volume/demand data, with broad coverage across AI engines. The tradeoff is that meaningful API/integration access tends to be enterprise-oriented. LLM Visibility Tools Geodocs

Semrush makes the most sense if your analytics stack already revolves around Semrush. Its AI Visibility Toolkit tracks citations across ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini and Google's AI experiences, while its existing API/SEO ecosystem can reduce the number of separate systems you have to wire together. Citation Hawk Otterly

Conductor is worth considering for a larger enterprise marketing organization. It combines AI visibility with the broader SEO/content workflow, and current comparisons list both API and MCP connectivity. Otterly

What I'd actually build

Rather than making the AI-visibility vendor your analytics system of record, I'd structure it like:

AI citation platform → API → warehouse → your BI/analytics layer

For example:

OtterlyAI → API → Snowflake/BigQuery → Looker/Tableau/Power BI

Then store dimensions such as:

• AI engine/model
• prompt
• brand mentioned/not mentioned
• cited/not cited
• cited URL
• citation position
• competitor mentions
• sentiment/recommendation
• geography
• timestamp
• prompt category/persona

That lets you correlate AI visibility → website traffic → conversions/revenue, rather than treating an AI visibility score as the KPI.

One particularly important distinction: mention monitoring isn't the same as citation monitoring. If your objective is "which pages/domains are AI systems actually citing?", make sure the vendor exposes the underlying source URL/domain and prompt-level response data, not just a proprietary visibility score. Current comparisons specifically highlight this as an important differentiator. Toolsolved Otterly

If you tell me what your existing stack is (e.g. GA4 + BigQuery + Looker, Snowflake + Tableau, Segment + Amplitude, etc.), I can narrow this to the 2–3 best integrations and show exactly how I'd wire the data in.

Semrush makes the most sense if your analytics stack already revolves around Semrush. Its AI Visibility Toolkit tracks citations across ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini and Google's AI experiences, while its existing API/SEO ecosystem can reduce the number of separate systems you have to wire together. Citation Hawk Otterly

Conductor is worth considering for a larger enterprise marketing organization. It combines AI visibility with the broader SEO/content workflow, and current comparisons list both API and MCP connectivity. Otterly

What I'd actually build

Rather than making the AI-visibility vendor your analytics system of record, I'd structure it like:

AI citation platform → API → warehouse → your BI/analytics layer

For example:

OtterlyAI → API → Snowflake/BigQuery → Looker/Tableau/Power BI

Then store dimensions such as:

• AI engine/model
• prompt
• brand mentioned/not mentioned
• cited/not cited
• cited URL
• citation position
• competitor mentions
• sentiment/recommendation
• geography
• timestamp
• prompt category/persona

That lets you correlate AI visibility → website traffic → conversions/revenue, rather than treating an AI visibility score as the KPI.

One particularly important distinction: mention monitoring isn't the same as citation monitoring. If your objective is "which pages/domains are AI systems actually citing?", make sure the vendor exposes the underlying source URL/domain and prompt-level response data, not just a proprietary visibility score. Current comparisons specifically highlight this as an important differentiator.

If your real requirement is “find incorrect AI attributions, identify the exact source/citation, and route the issue to the content owner who can fix it,” I’d narrow the field to Profound and Otterly.AI, with Profound as my first choice for an enterprise content operation.

My pick: Profound

tryprofound.com is the one I'd evaluate first if you're building a serious AI-answer attribution QA program. It is positioned around source-level citation intelligence rather than merely measuring whether your brand was mentioned, and current comparisons consistently put it toward the enterprise end of the category. Pressfit.ai SEO Counselors

The workflow I'd want is:

AI prompt → generated answer → cited URL → expected source → attribution error → content owner → correction → re-test

The critical distinction is that “brand mentioned” isn't the same as “correctly cited.” A useful system needs to preserve the underlying answer and the exact URLs cited, so your team can determine things like:

• AI says “Company X's policy is…” but cites the wrong article.
• AI attributes a statistic to your company that actually came from a competitor.
• AI combines facts from two of your pages and attributes them to one.
• An old page is cited even though your newer canonical page contains the correct information.
• Your content is cited but the model misrepresents what the page says.
• A competitor's page is being cited for information that your authoritative page actually owns.

Otterly is particularly interesting if you want a less expensive starting point: its current product says it stores generated answers, tracks every cited URL, and lets you inspect citations by prompt, engine, competitor, etc. It also exposes API/MCP and reporting capabilities. Otterly

Where I'd be careful

Most “AI visibility” platforms are fundamentally monitoring systems, not true attribution-QA systems. They can tell you “this URL was cited”, but that doesn't automatically mean “the citation is factually correct.” That's a much harder layer requiring comparison of the AI claim against the source content. Current comparisons make the same distinction: visibility tools measure the problem; they generally don't fix the underlying content. Lyra UX Continuum

So if incorrect attribution is your primary KPI, I'd actually evaluate vendors using a sample of 100–500 real buyer prompts and score each platform on:

1. Claim extraction — can you see what the AI actually claimed?
2. Citation extraction — exact URL cited?
3. Claim ↔ source verification — can you determine whether the source actually supports the claim?
4. Page-level ownership — map the URL to your CMS/content owner.
5. Error classification — wrong source, outdated source, unsupported claim, competitor attribution, etc.
6. Workflow integration — Jira/Linear/Slack/Asana/webhook/API.
7. Re-test history — after the writer fixes the page, can you measure whether the error disappeared?

If #3–#7 are non-negotiable, don't buy based on an “AI visibility score.” Ask vendors to demonstrate the workflow using your own content before signing.

If you tell me roughly how many pages/prompts you have and whether your content team works in Jira, Asana, Linear, or a CMS, I can give you a much more specific 3-tool shortlist and an evaluation scorecard.

Yes. The category you’re looking for is usually called AI Search Visibility / GEO (Generative Engine Optimization) monitoring. These platforms run relevant prompts through AI search engines and tell you whether your site is mentioned, which URLs are cited, which competitors are cited instead, and what you can do to improve. Otterly Otterly

My shortlist

• otterly.ai — probably the best fit if your main question is “Where is our website being cited by AI?” It tracks citations and mentions across ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews/AI Mode, Gemini, Claude and Copilot, and provides competitor/share-of-voice analysis and optimization insights. Otterly Otterly
• getprofound.com — stronger enterprise option. It goes deeper into AI-search analytics, competitive intelligence and citation/source analysis. SEO Counselors
• peec.ai — good middle ground if you want monitoring plus recommendations for improving AI visibility, rather than just reporting. Conbersa
• ahrefs.com — worth considering if you're already using Ahrefs for conventional SEO; its AI visibility capabilities can connect AI citations with your existing SEO/competitive data. OpenAIToolsHub
• athenahq.ai — another enterprise-oriented option, particularly around competitive AI visibility. Meridian15

What I'd choose

If your goal is specifically:

“Crawl/monitor AI assistants → show me where our domain is cited → compare us with competitors → tell me what content we should change.”

I'd start with OtterlyAI and Profound.

One important distinction: these aren't literally crawling every ChatGPT/Claude conversation. They run controlled sets of prompts against AI search experiences and analyze the resulting answers and cited URLs. That's important because AI answers are personalized and can change substantially between runs. Otterly

Also, citation count alone isn't the ideal KPI. Recent research suggests that a page's influence on the generated answer can matter more than simply being listed as a citation. arxiv.org

If you tell me your website/domain and industry, I can also give you a concrete recommendation between Otterly vs Profound vs Peec, including what I'd track (prompts, competitors, citations, Reddit/third-party mentions, etc.) and how I'd build the GEO program.

Yes — but there’s an important distinction.

There are now tools that show the exact prompts you’re tracking and the AI answers/citations they produce. But no tool can reliably tell you the exact private prompts that real users typed into ChatGPT/Gemini/etc. That information generally isn’t exposed by the AI platforms.

For a solo SEO freelancer, I’d think about it as “prompt discovery + AI visibility tracking.”

What you can actually measure

A good tool can tell you:

• The prompt: e.g. “best CRM for small real estate teams”
• Which AI engine: ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews, etc.
• The answer generated
• Whether your client/brand was mentioned
• Which URL/page was cited
• Which competitors were cited instead
• Sometimes the position/order of citations
• Changes in all of the above over time

For example, allsearch.io lets you generate/manage prompts and see prompt-level visibility, citations, competitors, and sources across multiple AI engines. AllSearch

ahrefs.com is particularly interesting for SEO freelancers because it derives prompts from real search behavior rather than simply inventing hypothetical questions. It checks ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Copilot and Google AI surfaces and reports the topics and pages being cited. Ahrefs

There are also dedicated trackers such as oneclickseo.ai and wellows.com that preserve the actual AI response and citation URLs for individual prompts. OneClickSEO Wellows

The really interesting opportunity for you

If what you're asking is:

“Can I find out which questions are causing AI to discover and cite my client's content?”

Yes, increasingly.

You can combine:

Google Search Console + keyword data → likely buyer questions → AI prompt tracking → cited URLs → content optimization

That's much more actionable than simply reporting an “AI visibility score.”

For example, suppose you're doing SEO for a commercial cleaning company.

You might discover that AI systems cite their article for:

• “How much does commercial cleaning cost?”
• “What should I look for in a commercial cleaning company?”
• “Best commercial cleaning companies for medical offices”
• “How often should an office be professionally cleaned?”

You can then see which specific page is getting cited for each prompt, and potentially build/modify content around the prompts where competitors are winning.

One caveat that's easy to miss

The phrase “exact prompts that lead to our content being used” can mean two different things:

1. Exact prompts you specify/test → yes, tools can track these precisely.
2. Exact prompts actual ChatGPT users typed before your content was cited → generally no. The platforms don't give SEOs a complete query log of users' private prompts.

Even vendors acknowledge this limitation: Otterly's GEO research describes AI search as having a “blind spot” because you can't directly see the exact prompts users are entering. Otterly

So I'd be skeptical of any product claiming it has a definitive database of all real ChatGPT prompts that caused your URL to be cited.

If you're a solo freelancer, I'd shortlist

For an SEO-first workflow: Ahrefs Brand Radar/AI Visibility — particularly compelling if you already use Ahrefs.

For inexpensive, granular prompt tracking: AllSearch or OneClickSEO.

For a dedicated AI visibility/AEO workflow: Otterly, Profound, Peec, etc. The market has gotten quite crowded in 2026. GeoHero Austin Heaton

But there's an even more interesting question: whether you can build a lightweight version of this yourself for clients — essentially “AI citations → prompt → page → recommendation” — without paying for one of the expensive enterprise AEO platforms.

For a solo freelancer, that could actually be a very good productized SEO service.

The category you’re looking for is usually called AI visibility tracking, GEO (Generative Engine Optimization) measurement, or AEO (Answer Engine Optimization) tools. These tools simulate (or replay) user prompts and measure whether AI assistants mention, cite, or recommend your pages. PageLens Search Engine Land

Good options depend on whether you want enterprise monitoring, SEO-team workflows, or quick validation:

A solid evaluation setup usually measures:

1. Prompt coverage

• Example prompts: - “What are the best tools for X?”
• “Compare X vs Y”
• “How do I solve problem Z?”
• “Which vendors should I consider for X?”
• AI assistant coverage

• ChatGPT
• Google Gemini / AI Overviews
• Perplexity
• Microsoft Copilot
• Claude (where available)
• Page-level outcomes

• Was your domain cited?
• Which URL was cited?
• Was your brand mentioned?
• Were competitors surfaced instead?
• What evidence did the AI use?
• Repeat sampling

• AI answers are not deterministic; a single prompt run can be misleading, so tracking trends over multiple runs is more useful. arXiv

If you’re trying to answer “will our product pages, docs, or landing pages get surfaced when buyers ask AI assistants?”, I’d shortlist:

• Enterprise: Profound or Ahrefs Brand Radar Ahrefs QueryOn
• Mid-market marketing team: Peec AI / Otterly.AI LLM Visibility Tools
• Technical team wanting custom control: build a prompt evaluation harness using your own prompt library and model APIs.

A useful next step is to create a “prompt universe” from your customer journey (100–1,000 realistic questions) and run that continuously rather than relying only on vendor-generated prompts. Ahrefs

For a small ecommerce team, I’d shortlist these:

• peec.ai — best fit if you care about individual products/SKUs. It now tracks product-level AI shopping visibility, including visibility, win rate, position, share of voice, cited price, competing products, and the prompts each product wins/loses. It can ingest a Shopify catalog or Google Merchant Center feed. Peec AI Peec AI
• semrush.com — best if you already use Semrush. It tracks AI visibility and share of voice vs. competitors across ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity and Google AI, plus prompt tracking and site-audit capabilities. Semrush Semrush
• tryprofound.com — strongest for deeper AI-shopping analysis. Its Shopping product goes down to SKU level, showing product visibility, placement, attributes, citations/keywords, and competitor products in ChatGPT Shopping. Profound

My pick

Start with Peec AI if your question is specifically “Which of our products are AI assistants recommending, and how much share of voice are we getting?” Its product-level analytics map particularly well to an ecommerce catalog. Peec AI Peec AI

One important distinction: brand AI visibility and product-page/URL visibility aren't quite the same. If you want to know “Does ChatGPT recommend SKU X and link to our product page?”, prioritize a tool with SKU-level shopping tracking rather than a generic AI brand-mention tracker.

If you tell me your store platform (Shopify, WooCommerce, etc.) and approximate SKU count, I can narrow this to the best 1–2 options and compare pricing/features.

For a global content team, I’d prioritize Semrush AI Visibility if you want broad multilingual/multi-market coverage with an existing enterprise SEO/content workflow. It currently advertises 68,000+ location-language combinations, plus weekly AI sentiment/share-of-voice reporting and daily prompt tracking across ChatGPT, Google AI Mode, and Gemini. Semrush

My shortlist

• Best overall for global teams: semrush.com

Strongest fit when you need to operationalize AI visibility across many countries and languages rather than just monitor a handful of prompts. The location-language scale is particularly compelling for multinational content programs. Semrush

• Best for enterprise-grade citation intelligence: Profound

Better choice if your primary requirement is deep, source-level analysis of why assistants cite particular pages, competitive visibility, and sophisticated enterprise reporting. Current comparisons consistently position it toward large enterprise programs. Lyra SEO Counselors

• Best multilingual-focused alternative: Peec AI

Worth a serious evaluation if language/region segmentation is more important than having a giant SEO suite. Recent comparisons specifically identify its multi-language/multi-region capability as a differentiator. Toolsolved Toolsolved

• Best lower-cost monitoring: Otterly.AI

Good for getting prompt/citation monitoring running quickly, but I'd choose it more for a smaller team or pilot than for a global content governance system. Lyra UX Continuum

What I would actually measure

Don't make the dashboard just "AI mentions." For every country × language × assistant × prompt cluster, track:

1. Answer visibility — how frequently your brand/product is present.
2. Citation rate — how frequently your owned content is actually cited.
3. Citation position — whether you're the primary source or buried among references.
4. Share of voice — your visibility versus named competitors.
5. Narrative accuracy/sentiment — what the AI is saying about you.
6. Page-level citation performance — which URLs are earning citations.
7. Language parity — whether, for example, your Spanish/French/Japanese visibility materially trails English.
8. Change detection — alerts when a major prompt, citation, competitor, or narrative changes.
9. AI referral traffic/conversion — ultimately connect visibility to business outcomes.

That distinction matters: AI visibility is increasingly about being cited and represented correctly, not merely being mentioned. Vogue TechRadar

The architecture I'd recommend

Central prompt library → localized prompt variants → AI monitoring → citation/page extraction → market/language dashboard → content remediation → re-test.

For example:

20 markets × 8 languages × 100 strategic questions × 4–6 assistants

I'd keep the core questions globally standardized, then localize the wording, products, competitors, currencies, regulations, and search intent. This makes cross-market comparisons meaningful without pretending that an English prompt translated literally into German or Japanese represents the same user behavior.

If you're buying one platform today: start with Semrush for the global content organization; shortlist Profound alongside it if citation-level intelligence is mission-critical; add Peec to the bake-off if multilingual depth is the deciding criterion.

If you tell me your number of markets/languages, approximate prompt volume, assistants you care about (ChatGPT/Gemini/Perplexity/AI Overviews/etc.), and whether you need API/BI integration, I can turn this into a weighted vendor scorecard and recommend the best setup.

What you’re looking for is generally called AI search visibility / GEO (Generative Engine Optimization) tracking. The key is to track not just whether ChatGPT mentions your company, but the exact prompt, position in the answer, competitors mentioned, and citations/sources.

My shortlist

• rankscale.ai — probably the closest match to your question. It explicitly tracks where your brand appears in ChatGPT answers, competitor positions, citations, prompt-level visibility, and region. Rankscale.ai
• tryprofound.com — my pick for a larger company/enterprise. It goes deeper into prompts, citations, sources, competitors, and AI-search analytics. Current comparisons describe it as the enterprise-oriented option. Bloomiro Tomek Sikora
• peec.ai — good middle ground for marketing teams. It emphasizes competitive benchmarking and measuring how prominently your brand appears in AI answers. Conbersa
• otterly.ai — a cheaper/easier starting point for monitoring mentions across ChatGPT and other AI engines. Bloomiro
• ahrefs.com — useful for a quick, free baseline. It checks how your brand appears across ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Copilot and Google AI Overviews. Ahrefs

One important distinction

There isn't really a universal “ChatGPT ranking #7” equivalent to a Google SERP position. ChatGPT generates answers rather than returning a fixed ranked list, and the output can vary between runs.

So I'd track metrics like:

That distinction matters because “Are we mentioned?” and “Where do we rank?” are different measurements. AnswerMonk Rankscale.ai

If your specific requirement is: “Give me a list of 100 questions my customers ask, run them through ChatGPT every week, tell me whether my company appears, exactly where it appears in each answer, who beats us, and what sources ChatGPT used” — I'd start by evaluating Rankscale and Profound, then compare them with Peec.

If you tell me your company, industry, and roughly how many prompts you want to track, I can recommend the best tool and lay out exactly how I'd set up the tracking.

Yes. This is now a fairly well-developed category, usually called AI visibility, GEO (Generative Engine Optimization), or answer-engine optimization.

The important distinction is that there are really two things you may want to measure:

1. Brand/product mentions — how often ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Claude, etc. mention your product, and how they describe it.
2. Citations/sources — how often your website/product pages are actually cited, and which third-party sites are influencing the AI's answer.

Platforms worth looking at

• peec.ai — probably the closest match to what you're describing. It tracks mention frequency, position, sentiment, competitors, and the sources/citations behind AI answers. It can also show the prompts that drive mentions. Peec AI Peec AI
• tryprofound.com — particularly strong for enterprise-level analysis. It tracks visibility, citations, sentiment, share of voice, positioning, and the actual prompts/responses being monitored. Profound Help Center Profound
• otterly.ai — good if you want broad coverage across ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews/AI Mode, Perplexity, Gemini, Claude, and Copilot. It reports both brand mentions and domain citations, down to individual prompts. Otterly AI Otterly AI

The "context" part is especially interesting

For example, rather than just telling you:

Your product was mentioned 137 times.

A good platform can tell you something closer to:

And then you can see which URLs the AI cited to arrive at that answer.

Profound, for example, explicitly analyzes how AI describes a brand, including recurring themes/narratives, while Peec tracks sentiment, position and the sources influencing the answer. Profound Peec AI

One particularly useful distinction from Peec is "brand mention" vs. "source citation." Your site can be used as a source even when the AI doesn't explicitly mention your brand. Peec AI

If you're evaluating this for your own product

I'd compare Peec vs. Profound vs. Otterly based on one question:

Do I want an SEO-style dashboard, or do I want to understand the actual narrative AI is constructing about my product?

If the latter is what you're after, I'd prioritize a tool that lets you inspect the individual prompt → AI response → mention → citation → context chain, rather than just giving you an "AI visibility score."

If you tell me what your product is and whether you're interested primarily in ChatGPT, or all AI search engines, I can also recommend the best platform for your use case and explain what data you'd actually get from each.

If you’re monitoring multiple client brands across different industries, I’d treat this as an agency-level AI visibility / GEO monitoring problem, not simply a “ChatGPT mention tracker.”

My recommendation

Shortlist tryprofound.com, Peec AI, and Visibrand, with Visibrand being the first one I’d test for an agency workflow.

visibrand.app specifically positions itself for agencies: it supports multiple brands, competitive reporting, API/webhooks, and white-label reporting. It monitors ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity and Gemini and reports AI share of voice. Visibrand

For a larger enterprise-grade deployment, Profound is worth evaluating alongside it. Recent industry comparisons identify Profound as one of the stronger options where enterprise-scale data depth is important. AI Visibility Software AI Visibility Software

What I would measure

For each client, create a standardized prompt universe:

• Core category prompts — “best accounting software for startups”
• Problem/solution prompts — “how should a 50-person company handle payroll?”
• Comparison prompts — “HubSpot vs Salesforce for a B2B SaaS company”
• Recommendation prompts — “what are the best…”
• Local prompts where relevant
• High-intent prompts — pricing, alternatives, reviews, implementation, etc.

Then track:

The important distinction is that SOV should be calculated against a consistent prompt set, rather than treating a generic “AI visibility score” as the KPI. Platforms such as Latentline explicitly use completed answers and competitor mentions to calculate this. Latentline

For an agency, I'd structure the dashboard like this

Portfolio → Client → Industry → Prompt cluster → Individual answer

For example:

Agency AI Visibility: 42 brands

🟢 18 gaining SOV
🟡 17 flat
🔴 7 losing SOV

Client: Acme Insurance

• ChatGPT SOV: 31% ↑ 4.2 pts
• Competitor A: 27%
• Competitor B: 19%
• Recommendation rate: 44%
• Citation share: 16%
• Biggest loss: “best small-business insurance”

Action: Competitor B is being cited repeatedly by 6 industry publications that Acme isn't appearing in.

That last layer is important. Don't just sell clients a dashboard showing that they lost visibility; show them why and what to do about it.

My shortlist

RivalSee is particularly interesting for agencies because it explicitly supports multiple clients and client-branded reports, while also tracking competitors across ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity, Google AI and Gemini. RivalSee Chatobserver similarly emphasizes stakeholder-ready reports and prompt/answer/citation history. Chatobserver

If I were building this into an agency offering

I'd package it as “AI Share of Voice Monitoring”, with:

1. 50–100 high-value prompts per client
2. Weekly automated sampling
3. ChatGPT as the primary KPI initially
4. Competitor tracking
5. Citation/source tracking
6. Historical SOV charts
7. Automated anomaly alerts
8. Monthly client report
9. “Why we won/lost” analysis
10. Recommended SEO/PR/content actions

And I'd benchmark ChatGPT separately from the other AI engines rather than immediately blending everything into one number. ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, etc. can produce materially different answers, so an aggregate score can hide useful differences.

Bottom line: for a multi-industry client portfolio, I'd start by piloting Visibrand vs. Profound vs. Peec AI on ~5 representative clients. Score them on prompt coverage, reproducibility, SOV accuracy, competitor analysis, citation intelligence, multi-client management, API/reporting, and cost per monitored prompt. That pilot will tell you much more than comparing feature lists.

For example:

Agency AI Visibility: 42 brands

🟢 18 gaining SOV
🟡 17 flat
🔴 7 losing SOV

Client: Acme Insurance

• ChatGPT SOV: 31% ↑ 4.2 pts
• Competitor A: 27%
• Competitor B: 19%
• Recommendation rate: 44%
• Citation share: 16%
• Biggest loss: “best small-business insurance”

Action: Competitor B is being cited repeatedly by 6 industry publications that Acme isn't appearing in.

That last layer is important. Don't just sell clients a dashboard showing that they lost visibility; show them why and what to do about it.

My shortlist

RivalSee is particularly interesting for agencies because it explicitly supports multiple clients and client-branded reports, while also tracking competitors across ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity, Google AI and Gemini. RivalSee Chatobserver similarly emphasizes stakeholder-ready reports and prompt/answer/citation history. chatobserver.com

If I were building this into an agency offering

I'd package it as “AI Share of Voice Monitoring”, with:

Yes. If your goal is specifically “What percentage of AI answers mention my brand for these keywords/prompts, and how does that compare with competitors?”, I’d shortlist these:

• otterly.ai — my top pick for straightforward keyword/prompt tracking. It lets you define the prompts your audience searches, then tracks brand coverage, share of voice, position, sentiment, and citations across ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews/AI Mode, Gemini, Copilot, and Claude. You can also break results down by prompt, engine, and market. Otterly Otterly AI
• peec.ai — best if you want a clean competitive SOV dashboard. It explicitly measures the percentage of AI responses mentioning your brand and your share of brand mentions versus competitors, with prompt-level tracking and daily updates. Peec AI Peec AI
• tryprofound.com — best for enterprise/GEO intelligence. It has visibility, Share of Voice, positioning, sentiment, citation share, topic/region/platform filters, and prompt-driven analysis. Profound Help Center Profound Help Center

What I'd choose

Start with OtterlyAI if you're trying to answer questions like:

“For the 200 keywords/prompts that matter to us, how often does ChatGPT mention our brand vs. HubSpot, Salesforce, and competitors?”

It has particularly explicit support for adding prompts/keywords and monitoring them automatically, and its Share of Voice metric is designed specifically for comparing your brand against named competitors. Otterly AI Otterly

One important distinction: AI “keyword tracking” isn't quite equivalent to Google keyword rank tracking. These platforms generally turn keywords into conversational prompts and repeatedly query AI engines, measuring whether/where your brand appears. That's much closer to how users actually encounter brands in AI assistants.

If you tell me your industry + roughly how many keywords you need to track (e.g. 50, 500, 5,000), I can recommend the best one and compare pricing, number of prompts, engines, API access, and reporting.

If your specific goal is “find when ChatGPT/Gemini/Perplexity/etc. says something negative, misleading, or factually wrong about our brand”, I’d shortlist the tools differently than if you only cared about AI visibility/SEO.

My recommendation

1. OtterlyAI — best overall for this use case

It currently tracks answers across ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews/AI Mode, Gemini, Copilot, and Claude, stores the answers, and specifically scores positive/neutral/negative sentiment. It also lets you inspect the sentence that triggered the sentiment classification and see the sources/citations behind the answer. Otterly Otterly

That makes it particularly well suited to a workflow like:

“Alert me when an AI assistant describes our product negatively, makes a false claim, or cites an outdated/wrong source.”

otterly.ai

2. Profound — best if you're an enterprise brand

I'd choose Profound if you need enterprise-scale AI visibility intelligence, governance, and deeper analysis rather than simply monitoring a set of prompts. Current comparisons consistently position it as the enterprise-oriented option. MentionsAPI Geodocs

3. Peec AI — best middle ground

Peec is attractive if you want competitive benchmarking and source intelligence alongside monitoring. It's particularly useful for answering “why is the AI recommending our competitor instead of us?” Conbersa Toolsolved

One important caveat

None of these should be treated as a perfect “AI misinformation detector.”

There are really two separate problems:

• Sentiment: “Did the AI say something negative about us?”
• Factual accuracy: “Is what it said actually false?”

The first is relatively straightforward to automate. The second requires comparing the AI's claim against your authoritative facts/data and ideally having a human review high-impact claims.

For example, I'd build your monitoring around prompts such as:

• “What are the disadvantages of [Brand]?”
• “What problems do customers have with [Brand]?”
• “Is [Brand] trustworthy?”
• “Has [Brand] had any controversies?”
• “Who owns [Brand]?”
• “How much does [Product] cost?”
• “Is [Product] compatible with X?”
• “What are the alternatives to [Brand]?”
• “Why shouldn't I buy/use [Brand]?”
• Your highest-volume customer questions

Then classify every answer into accurate / inaccurate / outdated / misleading / negative-but-valid / positive / neutral, rather than relying solely on sentiment.

What I'd buy

The key distinction is that “AI visibility monitoring” isn't quite the same product as “AI reputation monitoring.” The latter needs claim-level alerts and verification, not just share-of-voice scores.

If you tell me your company/brand, approximate size, and whether you care about ChatGPT only or ChatGPT + Gemini + Perplexity + Claude + Google AI, I can give you a much more specific recommendation and compare Otterly vs Profound vs Peec vs a custom solution.

Peec is attractive if you want competitive benchmarking and source intelligence alongside monitoring. It's particularly useful for answering “why is the AI recommending our competitor instead of us?”

One important caveat

None of these should be treated as a perfect “AI misinformation detector.”

There are really two separate problems:

• Sentiment: “Did the AI say something negative about us?”
• Factual accuracy: “Is what it said actually false?”

The first is relatively straightforward to automate. The second requires comparing the AI's claim against your authoritative facts/data and ideally having a human review high-impact claims.

For example, I'd build your monitoring around prompts such as:

If you’re a small agency and the goal is “what are AI assistants saying about my clients’ brands?”, I’d prioritize tools that let you monitor multiple clients without enterprise pricing.

My shortlist

1. otterly.ai — best budget choice

This would be my starting point. Its $29/month Lite plan gives you 15 tracked prompts, with daily monitoring across ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, Perplexity and Microsoft Copilot. You can add Gemini, Claude and Google AI Mode as paid add-ons. Otterly Otterly

For an agency, the limitation is prompt volume. But if you have, say, 3–5 clients and only want to track the most commercially important questions for each, it's a very inexpensive way to prove the service before investing more.

2. tryprofound.com — best step up

Profound's $99/month Starter tier tracks 50 prompts in ChatGPT, while its agency offering is specifically designed around prospect audits and client workspaces. Its Agency Growth plan is listed at $99/month and includes 10 pitch workspaces/month; full client workspaces are an additional $399/month. Profound G2

I'd consider this if you're trying to turn AI visibility/GEO into an actual agency service, rather than just monitoring mentions.

3. peec.ai — best if you already have several clients

Peec is much more agency-oriented: its agency plans support multiple client projects, centralized billing, shareable dashboards and automated client reporting. Peec Peec

The tradeoff is cost: its agency pricing starts around $245/month, so I'd probably avoid it until you have enough clients to justify the expense.

What I'd do in your shoes

Start with OtterlyAI. Don't try to monitor hundreds of prompts. For each client, create ~5–10 high-value conversational queries such as:

• “What are the best [category] companies in [city]?”
• “Which [category] brands would you recommend for [use case]?”
• “What are alternatives to [client]?”
• “What is the best [product/service] for [specific audience]?”
• “[Client] vs [competitor] — which is better?”

Then track mention frequency, position/recommendation, sentiment, competitors and citations/sources. That's much more useful to a client than a generic “AI visibility score.”

There is also an important distinction: AI brand monitoring isn't quite the same thing as traditional brand-mention monitoring. These platforms generally run controlled prompts repeatedly and analyze the resulting AI answers, rather than listening to every spontaneous ChatGPT conversation on the internet. Otterly explicitly describes its system this way. Otterly

If you tell me roughly how many clients you have (e.g. 5, 10, 20) and your monthly budget ($50 / $100 / $250 / $500), I can narrow this down to the best agency setup and estimate the cost per client.

2. tryprofound.com — best step up

Profound's $99/month Starter tier tracks 50 prompts in ChatGPT, while its agency offering is specifically designed around prospect audits and client workspaces. Its Agency Growth plan is listed at $99/month and includes 10 pitch workspaces/month; full client workspaces are an additional $399/month. Profound G2

I'd consider this if you're trying to turn AI visibility/GEO into an actual agency service, rather than just monitoring mentions.

3. peec.ai — best if you already have several clients

Peec is much more agency-oriented: its agency plans support multiple client projects, centralized billing, shareable dashboards and automated client reporting. peec.ai peec.ai

The tradeoff is cost: its agency pricing starts around $245/month, so I'd probably avoid it until you have enough clients to justify the expense.

What I'd do in your shoes

Start with OtterlyAI. Don't try to monitor hundreds of prompts. For each client, create ~5–10 high-value conversational queries such as:

If you mean mentions of your brand inside AI assistants (ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity, etc.), rather than ordinary web/social mentions, you’ll want an AI visibility / AI answer monitoring platform. These tools run repeated prompts, track whether your brand appears, measure changes over time, and alert you when visibility shifts.

Here are strong options:

SiftlyFor broader brand monitoring (news, Reddit, forums, social, reviews) that can complement AI tracking:

• Brandwatch — strong historical analysis, large-scale listening, and AI-powered spike detection. Brandwatch
• EyeOut — focuses on anomaly detection, sentiment shifts, and spike alerts across web/social/forums/reviews. EyeOut
• Hootsuite Lumen — useful if you already use Hootsuite and want historical conversation trends plus alerts. Hootsuite

What I’d shortlist by use case

• You care specifically about “How often do AI assistants mention/recommend us?”

• Start with Siftly AI, Profound, Otterly AI, or Peec AI. Siftly
• You’re a PR/reputation team watching sudden perception changes

• Brandwatch or EyeOut are better fits because they monitor broader conversation volume and sentiment spikes. Brandwatch EyeOut
• You’re a B2B company trying to influence AI recommendations

• Prioritize tools that show: - prompt-level tracking (“best tools for X”)
• competitor comparisons
• cited sources behind AI answers
• share of voice in AI responses
• historical visibility graphs

Before choosing, check whether the tool actually samples AI assistant outputs repeatedly. Some “AI monitoring” products only track web mentions or citations, which is a different problem.

If you tell me your company size (startup/mid-market/enterprise) and which assistants matter most (ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity), I can narrow this to 3–4 best fits.

If you mean “what % of AI-generated answers mention/recommend my brand vs. competitors?”, you want an AI visibility / AI search analytics platform, not traditional SEO rank tracking.

My shortlist

• otterly.ai — probably the best straightforward fit. It tracks share of voice, brand mentions, sentiment, citations, and competitors across ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews/AI Mode, Gemini, Copilot, and Claude. Otterly Otterly
• semrush.com — good if you're already using Semrush. Its Brand Performance reporting calculates AI SoV using both mention frequency and position, and benchmarks you against competitors. Semrush
• Profound — worth considering for enterprise-grade monitoring, especially if you need granular prompt, source, citation, and competitive analysis. Independent 2026 benchmarking also places it among the leading platforms. Benchline Reports Tomek Sikora
• Peec AI — particularly interesting if competitive share-of-voice analysis is the main objective; a 2026 benchmark specifically identified it as strong on competitive SoV. Benchline Reports

What I'd measure

Don't use just “mentions.” I'd build an AI SoV dashboard around:

AI Share of Voice → Brand Coverage → Recommendation/Position → Sentiment → Citations → Competitor Gap

For example:

Across 1,000 category prompts, Brand A appears in 31% of answers, Competitor B in 24%, Competitor C in 18%, etc.

Then break that down by AI engine, prompt/topic, country, competitor, and time period. This is important because AI answers are dynamic, so a one-off manual test isn't a reliable measurement. Semrush Cognizo

If I had to pick one to test first: OtterlyAI. It is unusually explicit about the exact metric you're asking for—share of AI answers naming your brand versus competitors—and provides the underlying mention/citation data rather than just a generic “AI visibility” score. Otterly

If you tell me your industry + 3–5 competitors + whether you're SMB/mid-market/enterprise, I can also give you a side-by-side comparison of the best 3 tools for your specific use case.

Yes. I’d recommend treating this as an AI-answer competitive intelligence / GEO monitoring problem rather than traditional SEO rank tracking.

Recommended solution

For a serious marketing team, I’d start with tryprofound.com or peec.ai and build your reporting around a fixed prompt universe.

Current AI-visibility platforms can monitor brand mentions, competitors, citations, rankings, and share of voice across ChatGPT and other answer engines. TechnologyAdvice The Rank Masters

The metric I would use

Define AI Share of Voice (SOV) as:

Your brand mentions ÷ total tracked competitor mentions × 100

For example, if across 1,000 relevant AI answers you get 180 mentions, while competitors get 420 + 250 + 150:

• Your brand: 18% SOV
• Competitor A: 42%
• Competitor B: 25%
• Competitor C: 15%

This is preferable to simply counting whether you're mentioned, because it tells you who is winning the recommendation space. Several current platforms use essentially this approach. AnswerMonk Siftly

What I'd monitor

Don't just run generic prompts like "best X software." Build a representative prompt panel:

• Category discovery: "What are the best X tools?"
• Comparison: "X vs Y"
• Problem/solution: "How do I solve [customer problem]?"
• Use case: "Best X for [industry/use case]"
• Buying intent: "What should I consider when buying X?"
• Alternative intent: "Alternatives to [competitor]"
• Brand-specific: "[Your brand] reviews / pricing / alternatives"
• Negative/problem prompts: "What are the drawbacks of X?"

Then run the same prompts repeatedly across ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Claude and Google AI Overviews/AI Mode, rather than treating one ChatGPT response as representative. AI answers are nondeterministic, so repeated sampling and fixed prompt sets are important. GeoEcho SourceWatch

Dashboard I'd build

Your executive dashboard should have:

The citation gap is particularly actionable: if ChatGPT repeatedly recommends Competitor A because it cites three review sites and comparison articles that never mention you, you have a concrete content/PR target. Current platforms increasingly expose this underlying citation data rather than just the headline score. RankZero Foglift

My preferred architecture

If you want something more sophisticated than buying a dashboard:

Prompt database → AI engine runner → response archive → entity/brand extraction → ranking + sentiment → citation extraction → SOV calculation → dashboard/alerts

I'd store every observation as:

date | engine | prompt | response | brand | mentioned | position | sentiment | cited_source | competitor_set

That gives you an auditable dataset rather than a mysterious "AI visibility score."

One important measurement rule

Keep the denominator fixed.

If you change your prompt set, competitors, engines, or measurement period, your SOV can move even though your actual visibility hasn't. This is a major issue with AI-answer measurement, and current monitoring vendors explicitly emphasize fixed prompt sets and comparable measurement windows. Foglift

So I'd report:

AI SOV = 27.4% (+4.2pp MoM)

rather than just:

AI visibility = 74

That makes the metric much easier to benchmark against competitors and manage like a conventional market-share KPI.

Which solution I'd choose

• Enterprise / serious GEO program: Profound
• Focused AI-search monitoring: Peec AI
• Need a simpler SOV-oriented product: Siftly, AnswerMonk, or SourceWatch
• Want to build proprietary competitive intelligence: API-driven prompt collection + your own warehouse/dashboard

There are now enough purpose-built products that I wouldn't build the entire collection layer from scratch unless your competitive intelligence requirements are unusual. Current market comparisons include Profound, Peec, OtterlyAI, Scrunch, Ahrefs Brand Radar, Semrush and others. TechnologyAdvice

If you tell me your industry + 3–10 competitors + which AI assistants matter, I can design the exact prompt taxonomy, SOV formula, dashboard KPIs, and weekly reporting framework I'd use.

If you mean AI share of voice (SOV) as in “how often ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Claude, etc. mention or recommend us versus competitors,” I’d look at AI visibility monitoring platforms rather than traditional brand monitoring tools.

My shortlist:

My recommendation by scenario

• Large company / VP Marketing needs reporting: start with Profound. Honeyb
• SEO/content team trying to improve AI discoverability: look at Otterly AI or Peec AI. Honeyb
• You mainly want alerts like “Competitor X overtook us for these buyer prompts”: evaluate RankZero or similar competitor-gap tools. RankZero
• You want something lightweight and inexpensive to validate the metric: Saidly or Spottlo-style tools may be enough. Saidly Spottlo

When evaluating, I’d make sure the tool can:

• Track your exact buyer prompts (not just brand mentions)
• Compare against a fixed competitor set
• Alert on SOV drops, not only absolute mentions
• Show which prompts caused the decline
• Show citations/sources competitors are winning from
• Separate results by model (ChatGPT vs Gemini vs Perplexity, etc.)

If you tell me your company size, industry, and whether you care more about ChatGPT visibility, AI search traffic, or brand reputation, I can narrow this to 1–2 tools.

Yes. This is an emerging category usually called AI Search Visibility, Generative Engine Optimization (GEO), Answer Engine Optimization (AEO), or AI Share of Voice tracking. These solutions measure which brands/content are being surfaced, cited, and recommended in AI-generated answers instead of just tracking traditional search rankings. slatehq.com

The better platforms can answer questions like:

• Which competitors appear when buyers ask AI tools category questions?
• Which prompts are they winning that we are losing?
• Which competitor URLs/content assets are being cited by AI models?
• What topics, claims, reviews, comparisons, or authority signals are causing them to win?
• What is our AI share of voice vs. competitors over time? www.cyted.appwww.tryprofound.comwww.pingaura.ai

Some solutions in this space:

A typical workflow looks like this:

1. Build a prompt universe
   • “best CRM for startups”
   • “alternatives to [category leader]”
   • “who provides enterprise [solution]”
   • “compare X vs Y”

2. Run those prompts across AI engines
   • ChatGPT
   • Gemini
   • Perplexity
   • Google AI Overviews
   • Copilot

3. Capture:
   • brands mentioned
   • recommendation position
   • sentiment
   • cited domains
   • cited URLs
   • content themes

4. Create a competitive gap map

Example:

The important distinction: the winning content is often not the highest Google-ranking page. AI systems may favor content with stronger evidence, clearer entities, reviews, citations, structured information, and third-party mentions. www.pingaura.ai

If you are evaluating this for a marketing/SEO team, I would look for a tool that provides prompt-level competitor analysis + citation URL discovery, not just a percentage “AI visibility score.” The actionable question is not only “who is winning?” but “which exact sources and content patterns are causing them to win?” www.cyted.appwww.tryprofound.comwww.pingaura.ai

Yes. For a local business, I’d prioritize tools that track actual AI answers and citations by location, not just generic “AI SEO” scores.

My shortlist for 2026

Independent 2026 comparisons similarly put Profound, Otterly, Scrunch, Ahrefs, ZipTie, Semrush and others among the leading AI-visibility platforms. TechnologyAdvice Citation Hawk

What I'd choose for a local business

Start with Otterly AI if you're managing one or a few locations.

The important thing isn't simply whether AI mentions your company. You want to measure:

• Citation rate: how often your website is actually cited
• Mention rate: how often the business is recommended/mentioned
• Share of voice: how often competitors appear instead
• Which pages get cited
• Which prompts produce citations
• Performance by AI platform
• Geographic variation — e.g. “best plumber in Columbus” versus “best plumber near me”
• Changes over time

That's particularly important for local businesses because visibility can differ dramatically between AI platforms. A recent local-business study found only 4.6% of recommended businesses were named by all four of ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude and Perplexity in its test set. Visibility Index

One thing I'd avoid

Don't buy a tool just because it gives you an “AI visibility score.” The useful underlying data is the actual prompt → AI response → mention/citation → cited URL → competitor chain.

For example, you want to be able to see something like:

“Best HVAC companies in Columbus”
ChatGPT → Your Business: #2 recommendation → cites /hvac-services/
Perplexity → Your Business: not mentioned
Gemini → Your Business: #4 recommendation → cites Yelp
Google AI Overview → not present

That tells you what to fix. A single score doesn't.

If you're already paying for local SEO software

If you already use BrightLocal, it's worth evaluating its AI visibility functionality rather than adding another subscription. Conversely, if you already use Ahrefs or Semrush, their AI modules may be the most economical option. Current comparisons specifically identify BrightLocal as a practical option for single-location businesses and Ahrefs/Semrush as logical choices for existing SEO-suite customers. Pleiades Consultancy TechnologyAdvice

If you tell me what type of local business you have, how many locations, and roughly what you'd like to spend per month, I can narrow this to the 2–3 best tools and compare their actual pricing, AI platforms, local/geographic tracking, and citation reporting.

If your goal is “show me the exact questions people ask AI, and which of my how-to pages get cited for those questions”, you want an AI visibility / citation-tracking platform with prompt-level and URL-level data, not just a generic “AI SEO score.”

My shortlist

• tryprofound.com — best for deep citation intelligence.

It’s the one I’d look at first if you have a serious content/GEO program. It tracks prompts across major AI surfaces and gives source-level citation data. Current comparisons consistently put it in the enterprise/deep-analytics category. Bloomiro SEO Counselors

• peec.ai — best balance for a content/SEO team.

Particularly useful if you want to see which prompts produce visibility, which competitors are cited, and where your citation gaps are without buying a huge enterprise platform. Bloomiro UX Continuum

• otterly.ai — best inexpensive starting point.

It lets you define the questions you care about and monitor them repeatedly across AI engines. Current pricing comparisons put its entry tier around $29/month. UX Continuum ToolChase

• ahrefs.com — particularly interesting for your “exact queries” requirement.

Ahrefs says its index is based on 459M+ real prompts, modeled from its keyword database, rather than purely synthetic prompts. That makes it unusually useful for discovering the query universe around a topic, although it's more of a massive research/indexing layer than a dedicated page-by-page citation monitoring system. Ahrefs

The important distinction

There are actually two different questions hiding in your request:

1. “What prompts cause AI to cite my guide?”

You need a tracker that stores something like:

Prompt → AI engine → answer → cited URLs → your URL → citation position

Profound, Peec, Otterly and similar tools are built around this workflow. Citation Hawk Siftly

2. “What prompts are real users asking that I haven't thought of?”

That's harder. Most visibility trackers require you to supply the prompts. Ahrefs' huge real-prompt database is more interesting for discovering the underlying question/query space. Ahrefs

So for a site full of how-to guides, I'd ideally use:

Ahrefs → discover the question universe → Peec/Profound → monitor those questions → URL-level citation analysis → update guides based on citation gaps.

And I'd specifically avoid choosing a tool solely because it gives you a single “AI visibility score.” You want the raw prompt + answer + cited-source data. Some tools expose that evidence while others mostly give you aggregated scores. austinheaton.com

If you tell me roughly how many how-to articles you have (e.g. 50, 500, 5,000) and whether you're targeting ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, Perplexity, or all of them, I can narrow this to the 2–3 tools that fit your use case and budget.

Yes. If your developer team wants to pull AI citation/visibility data via API and build its own dashboards, there are several credible options. The best choice depends on whether you want raw citation events or a more complete AI-search analytics dataset.

My recommendation

If your team is actually building the data infrastructure, I'd investigate MentionsAPI first. It is specifically designed around citation extraction: it returns which URL was cited, for which prompt, and by which AI provider, while resolving/deduplicating citations. MentionsAPI

That gives you a relatively clean underlying data model such as:

prompt
├── provider
├── model
├── timestamp
├── answer
└── citations[]
    ├── url
    ├── canonical_url
    ├── domain
    └── position

You can then put that into your own warehouse and build dashboards in Looker, Tableau, Power BI, Grafana, or a custom React app.

If you want less engineering and more pre-computed marketing metrics, I'd look at OtterlyAI. Its API exposes brand reports, prompts, citations, and workspace data, while its analytics layer includes citations, mentions, sentiment and share-of-voice across seven AI engines. Otterly Otterly

For an enterprise-grade analytics layer, Profound is worth evaluating. It is geared toward deeper brand intelligence and competitive/share-of-voice analysis, although API access and pricing are more enterprise-oriented. Toolsolved

The important distinction

I'd separate the market into two categories:

1. Citation extraction APIs

You want:

"For this prompt, what URLs did ChatGPT/Claude/Perplexity cite?"

→ MentionsAPI is particularly interesting.

2. AI visibility platforms with APIs

You want:

"What is our AI visibility score, share of voice, sentiment, competitor position, citation rate, and trend over time?"

→ OtterlyAI, Promptwatch, Peec, or Profound are more appropriate. A recent comparison also identifies Promptwatch as particularly strong for programmatic access to visibility, citation, prompt and competitor data. Toolsolved

If you're building a developer-facing AI citation dashboard, I'd probably shortlist MentionsAPI + OtterlyAI + Promptwatch and compare their actual API schemas, rate limits, pricing, historical-data access, and whether they return the full AI answer alongside citations. That last point can make a huge difference to what your team can build.

If your goal is specifically AI share of voice across multiple LLMs, rather than general SEO, I’d shortlist these:

*Current advertised pricing; annual/monthly billing can differ.

My recommendation

I'd start with Profound if you can justify ~$400/month. Its Growth plan tracks 100 prompts across three answer engines and analyzes brand/competitor presence, citations, sentiment and rankings. Its Enterprise offering expands to nine answer engines. Profound Profound

For a small marketing team with a tighter budget, I'd choose OtterlyAI. Its Standard plan is $189/month for 100 prompts with daily tracking across ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, Perplexity and Copilot. Claude, Gemini and Google AI Mode can be added separately. Otterly Otterly

Peec is particularly interesting if your definition of "multiple LLMs" is broad: its standard coverage includes ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, Google AI Mode, Microsoft Copilot, Perplexity and Gemini, with additional models available as add-ons. Peec AI

Scrunch is compelling at $250/month if you want 125 prompts, competitor tracking, citations, sentiment and site audits. The catch is that the Core plan only covers four engines; the broader nine-engine coverage is Enterprise. Scrunch Scrunch

What I'd actually measure

Don't choose based simply on "number of LLMs." For AI share of voice, I'd make sure the product can report:

• Brand mention rate — % of relevant prompts where you're mentioned
• Share of voice — your presence relative to competitors
• Position/ranking — where you're recommended when multiple brands appear
• Citation share — which sites/content are causing the models to mention you
• Sentiment/recommendation strength
• Prompt-level results — so you can see why SOV changed
• Model-by-model SOV — e.g. ChatGPT vs Gemini vs Perplexity
• Competitive benchmarking
• Historical trends — ideally daily/weekly
• Prompt discovery — finding the questions customers are actually asking

One important distinction: "AI visibility" isn't necessarily the same thing as true market share of voice. A platform may report that you appear in 40% of tracked responses, but that number is only meaningful if your prompt set represents the buying questions your customers actually ask.

If you tell me your approximate monthly budget (e.g. <$100, $100–250, $250–500) and whether you're B2B or B2C, I can narrow this to the 2 best options and compare them feature-by-feature.

For a small marketing team with a tighter budget, I'd choose OtterlyAI. Its Standard plan is $189/month for 100 prompts with daily tracking across ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, Perplexity and Copilot. Claude, Gemini and Google AI Mode can be added separately. Otterly Otterly

Peec is particularly interesting if your definition of "multiple LLMs" is broad: its standard coverage includes ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, Google AI Mode, Microsoft Copilot, Perplexity and Gemini, with additional models available as add-ons. peec.ai

Scrunch is compelling at $250/month if you want 125 prompts, competitor tracking, citations, sentiment and site audits. The catch is that the Core plan only covers four engines; the broader nine-engine coverage is Enterprise.

What I'd actually measure

Don't choose based simply on "number of LLMs." For AI share of voice, I'd make sure the product can report:

If your goal is long-term LLM visibility tracking across a portfolio of ecommerce sites, I’d shortlist these:

My pick: Peec AI

peec.ai is probably the best fit if you're managing multiple ecommerce domains and care about trend data rather than one-off GEO audits.

Why I’d choose it:

• Daily tracking of visibility, position, sentiment, and share of voice. Peec AI Peec AI
• Tracks ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews, Google AI Mode, Gemini and Copilot, with model-level comparisons. Peec AI
• Supports multiple projects/client workspaces, which is particularly useful for a portfolio. Peec AI
• Lets you track source citations as well as brand mentions—important for ecommerce because an LLM can cite your product/category content without explicitly mentioning the brand. Peec AI
• API, CSV, Looker Studio and MCP support make it much easier to roll the data into a portfolio-level BI dashboard. Peec AI

For a portfolio, I'd actually build a dataset around:

Site → category → product/topic → prompt cluster → model → visibility → position → citations → competitors → sentiment

That gives you a much more useful 12–24 month "AI share of search" trend than simply looking at a single visibility score.

Strong alternative: OtterlyAI

otterly.ai is arguably better if your emphasis is website/domain citation tracking.

It tracks brand mentions, share of voice, sentiment, rankings, and the specific URLs/domains cited by AI answers. It also has multi-brand workspaces, exports and a Looker Studio connector. Otterly Otterly

That's particularly attractive for ecommerce because you can answer questions like:

"Which of our category/product pages are actually becoming sources for LLM answers?"

rather than merely:

"Did our brand get mentioned?"

How I'd rank them

Bottom line: I'd start with Peec AI for a portfolio of ecommerce sites, particularly if you want to eventually aggregate the data across properties. I'd choose OtterlyAI instead if URL-level citation tracking and understanding which pages LLMs use as sources is the primary objective. Current platform coverage is moving quickly, so I'd validate the exact engines and historical-data retention in a trial before committing to a multi-year measurement program. Peec AI Otterly

If you tell me roughly how many sites/domains you have (e.g. 10, 50, 500+), I can also compare Peec vs Otterly vs Profound specifically on portfolio scale, pricing, historical data, API limits, and ecommerce/product-level tracking.

If your specific goal is “show me which content formats are actually getting cited by AI assistants, and help me benchmark that against competitors,” I’d look at tryprofound.com first.

Why:

• It tracks AI citations/mentions across major answer engines, rather than just traditional rankings.
• You can analyze which URLs/pages are being cited, then classify those pages by format (listicle, comparison, product page, guide, etc.).
• It’s particularly useful for competitive citation analysis—i.e., seeing what competitors are getting cited for that you aren't.
• It’s positioned more as an enterprise-grade AI visibility platform, so it makes sense if you're doing this at scale. Nick Lafferty Siftly

If you want the format-level insight specifically

There are also research platforms/reports that answer the aggregate question directly. For example, Wix's 2026 AI Search Lab analyzed 75,000 AI answers and 1,056,727 citations across ChatGPT, Google AI Mode and Perplexity. It found that listicles (21.9%), articles (16.7%), and product pages (13.7%) accounted for more than half of citations overall. wix.com

But I'd distinguish that from a tool you can use continuously:

Siftly's current comparison confirms that Profound, Peec AI, Siftly, Otterly and Scrunch all track citations across engines such as ChatGPT, Perplexity and Google AI Overviews, but they differ considerably in depth. Siftly

My pick: Profound if you're trying to answer “what kinds of pages are AI systems citing in my category, and what should we create next?” rather than merely “does my brand appear in ChatGPT?”

If you tell me your industry/site type (e.g. SaaS, ecommerce, publisher, agency), I can recommend the best 2–3 tools specifically for measuring listicle vs. how-to vs. comparison vs. product-page citation rates.

If your goal is an agency productized service where every month each client gets a polished “How visible are we in ChatGPT/Gemini/Perplexity/Google AI?” report, I’d shortlist these:

Recent agency-focused comparisons consistently put Peec, Otterly, Profound and Scrunch among the leading options, while newer options such as Baarely and Promptwatch are particularly interesting around white-labeling and turning visibility data into actions. The Rank Masters Baarely AI Search Tools

🥇 My pick: Peec AI

For a typical SEO/content/marketing agency, Peec is probably the sweet spot.

Why:

• Clean, client-friendly visibility dashboards
• Multi-client/project structure
• Competitor comparisons
• Prompt tracking
• Share-of-voice/visibility-type metrics
• Multiple AI engines
• Agency-oriented reporting
• Looker Studio integration, which is especially useful if you want to make the dashboard look like your agency's reporting environment rather than a vendor portal. The Rank Masters Koalr

The important distinction is that you're not really selling clients “an AI visibility dashboard.” You're selling a monthly GEO/AEO report.

I'd structure the client dashboard roughly as:

AI Visibility

• Overall visibility score
• Visibility vs. previous month
• Visibility vs. competitors
• Share of AI answers
• Brand mentions
• Citation frequency
• Which AI engines mention them

What AI Says

• Top prompts where they appear
• Prompts where competitors win
• Positive/negative/incorrect claims
• Most frequently cited sources

Opportunities

• Content gaps
• Pages that should be improved
• Sources competitors are getting cited from
• New prompts/categories to target

Monthly Executive Summary

• “Visibility increased 18%”
• “You now appear in 42% of category prompts”
• “Competitor X gained 7 points”
• “3 publications are disproportionately influencing AI answers”
• “Here are the 5 actions we recommend this month”

That last section is what turns software data into an agency deliverable.

🥈 If you want the cheapest/easiest setup: Otterly

otterly.ai

Otterly is attractive if you're trying to launch this as a new service without spending heavily. Current comparisons put its entry pricing around $29/month, with additional engines/features available at higher tiers. Its agency workflow can be paired with Looker Studio for branded dashboards. Baarely DeepSmith

I'd choose it if you have lots of SMB clients and relatively standardized reports.

🥉 If your clients are enterprise: Profound

tryprofound.com

Profound is the one I'd investigate for higher-end clients who will ask questions like:

“Why is ChatGPT recommending our competitor?”

rather than simply:

“What's our AI visibility score?”

It goes much deeper into answer/citation analysis and enterprise-grade insights. The tradeoff is cost and complexity; its agency/enterprise economics make much more sense when you're charging clients thousands rather than hundreds per month. The Rank Masters Bloomiro

⭐ One I would investigate specifically for white-label reports: Baarely

Baarely is particularly interesting if the report itself is the product you're selling.

Its agency offering reportedly includes white-label PDF and HTML reporting, rather than merely giving you access to another company's dashboard. Baarely

That's a meaningful distinction.

If your sales pitch is:

“Every month we send you a branded AI Search Visibility Report showing how your company appears across ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, etc.”

then native white-label reporting can be more valuable than having the world's deepest analytics.

What I'd choose by agency type

• 5–25 SMB/mid-market clients: Peec
• 25–100+ smaller clients: Otterly
• Enterprise SEO/AEO consultancy: Profound
• Premium white-label monthly reports: Baarely
• AI visibility + actual optimization/content recommendations: Promptwatch
• AI visibility + AI-agent/crawler monitoring: Scrunch

One important caveat: don't select based purely on the number of LLMs tracked. The quality of the prompts, geographic/language controls, historical data, citation analysis, client separation, export/API capability and reporting workflow matter much more for an agency. Recent agency comparisons specifically flag white-labeling and multi-client economics as major differentiators. Koalr Maya

If you tell me roughly how many clients you want to report on (e.g. 10, 50, 200) and what you'd charge each client/month, I can narrow this down to the best 2–3 options and calculate the software cost + gross margin per client.

🥉 If your clients are enterprise: Profound

tryprofound.com

Profound is the one I'd investigate for higher-end clients who will ask questions like:

“Why is ChatGPT recommending our competitor?”

rather than simply:

“What's our AI visibility score?”

It goes much deeper into answer/citation analysis and enterprise-grade insights. The tradeoff is cost and complexity; its agency/enterprise economics make much more sense when you're charging clients thousands rather than hundreds per month. The Rank Masters bloomiro.com

⭐ One I would investigate specifically for white-label reports: Baarely

Baarely is particularly interesting if the report itself is the product you're selling.

Its agency offering reportedly includes white-label PDF and HTML reporting, rather than merely giving you access to another company's dashboard. Baarely

That's a meaningful distinction.

If your sales pitch is:

“Every month we send you a branded AI Search Visibility Report showing how your company appears across ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, etc.”

then native white-label reporting can be more valuable than having the world's deepest analytics.

What I'd choose by agency type

If you’re a freelance writer trying to get clients’ articles cited or recommended by AI assistants (ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Claude, Google AI Overviews), you’re looking for Answer Engine Optimization (AEO) or Generative Engine Optimization (GEO) tools. These help you understand what AI systems cite, which competitors appear, and how to structure content so it is more “citable.” CiteFlow HubSpot

For a freelancer, I would not start with expensive enterprise platforms. I’d test one of these:

Best starting options for a freelance writer

1. Semrush AI Visibility tools — best if you already do SEO

Best for: writers who already offer keyword research, content briefs, and SEO packages.

Why it fits:

• Combines traditional SEO with AI visibility tracking.
• Helps you show clients “your article appears in AI answers for these prompts.”
• Easier to bundle into a content strategy service. geoaeo Index

Good freelance offer:

“I’ll optimize your articles for Google + AI search visibility.”

2. Otterly.ai — best budget-friendly AI monitoring

Best for: solo writers testing AEO services.

Why it fits:

• Designed around tracking AI answers and mentions.
• More accessible than enterprise tools.
• Useful for creating before/after reports for clients. HubSpot

3. Peec AI — best for agency-style reporting

Best for: freelancers managing several client brands.

Why it fits:

• Focuses on AI search visibility monitoring.
• Useful if you want recurring monthly “AI presence reports.” CiteFlow

4. Profound — best if you move upmarket

Best for: writers working with larger companies.

Why it fits:

• Stronger tracking depth across multiple AI engines.
• More suited to marketing teams than individual writers. cloro

My recommendation for a freelance writer

I’d build a service stack like this:

1. Research

• Traditional SEO: Semrush, Ahrefs, Google Search Console (if you have client access)
• AI research: manually test prompts in ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini
• Optimization

• Write articles that: - answer specific questions directly
• include clear definitions
• use expert quotes/data
• cite authoritative sources
• include FAQs
• demonstrate first-hand experience
• Measurement

• Use Otterly.ai or Semrush AI visibility features to create client reports.

A good freelance positioning angle is not:

“I write AI-optimized articles.”

It is:

“I create content designed to earn visibility in both Google search and AI-generated answers.”

One caution: no tool can guarantee that ChatGPT or another chatbot will recommend an article. These platforms can only help you measure visibility signals and improve the odds; AI systems choose sources based on factors like relevance, authority, freshness, and trustworthiness. CiteFlow

If you’re trying to sell AEO writing as a freelance service, I’d also consider building a sample case study (one article → tracked prompts → AI mentions/citations over time), because clients understand proof better than the terminology.

For a small agency managing several clients, I’d prioritize multi-platform coverage, citation-level data, client reporting, and price rather than buying an enterprise GEO platform.

My shortlist

🏆 What I'd pick

Start with OtterlyAI.

The particularly useful part for an agency is that it doesn't just tell you "Client X appeared in ChatGPT." It can show which prompts generated the appearance, where the brand appeared in the answer, which URLs were cited, which competitors were cited instead, and how those metrics change over time. otterly.ai

That's much closer to the reporting clients actually want:

AI visibility: 42% → 57%
Prompts won: 31 → 46
Brand mentions: 18 → 29
Citations: 12 → 24
Competitor citations displaced: 7

It also covers enough of the ecosystem that you're not optimizing specifically for one model: ChatGPT + Perplexity + Gemini + Google AI surfaces + Copilot + Claude. otterly.ai

One important distinction

Don't evaluate these tools primarily on a generic "AI visibility score." I'd want four underlying metrics:

1. Mention rate — does the AI mention the client?
2. Answer position — is the client #1/#2 recommendation or buried?
3. Citation rate — does the AI actually cite the client's site?
4. Citation sources — which third-party sites are getting cited instead?

That fourth one is particularly valuable for an agency because it turns monitoring into an optimization/PR/content strategy: "AI keeps citing these 8 publications when answering questions about our client; let's figure out why." AI-search monitoring is increasingly moving toward this citation/source analysis rather than simple rank tracking. slatehq.com

If you tell me roughly how many clients you manage (e.g. 5, 20, 50+) and your monthly budget ($50 / $200 / $500+), I can narrow this to the best 2–3 and compare their current agency pricing/features.

If your goal is specifically tracking and comparing brand visibility across AI answer engines over time, I’d shortlist Peec AI and Profound, with Peec AI as my default recommendation for most marketing teams.

1. Peec AI — best overall fit

Peec AI is purpose-built around AI visibility tracking. It measures:

• Visibility — how often your brand appears in AI answers
• Position — where you appear when mentioned
• Sentiment / brand perception
• Share of voice vs. competitors
• Citations and source visibility
• Performance by AI engine, prompt, topic, country, and time period

It currently covers major engines including ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Google AI Overviews/AI Mode, Claude, Copilot and others, with daily tracking. Peec AI Peec AI

The particularly useful part for your use case is the historical trend and competitor benchmarking: you can see whether visibility is increasing or declining, which engines are responsible, and where competitors are gaining ground. Peec also now connects AI visibility with actual AI-referred website traffic and conversions, which is useful if you're trying to move beyond a vanity metric. Peec AI

peec.ai

2. Profound — best for enterprise/deeper analysis

Profound is the one I'd investigate if you're an enterprise brand or have a large SEO/content/PR operation.

Its Answer Engine Insights tracks visibility, share of voice, sentiment, positioning and citations across answer engines, with historical comparisons and filtering by platform, topic and region. Profound Help Center Profound Help Center

A major differentiator is its large underlying dataset of real user AI conversations, which it uses to help identify which prompts are actually worth tracking rather than making you guess a list of keywords. Profound Profound

tryprofound.com

My pick

If I were evaluating one tool first, I'd start with Peec AI. Its metric set maps almost exactly to your question: “How visible is our brand in AI answers, how does that compare with competitors, and is that changing over time?” Peec AI

One caveat: don't judge these platforms solely by their headline "visibility score." I'd specifically test whether the tool gives you consistent prompt sets, engine-level breakdowns, competitor tracking, historical data, citations, and regional segmentation. AI answers are inherently variable, so methodological consistency matters a lot when you're measuring change over time.

Yes. The category you’re looking for is generally called AI visibility tracking, LLM visibility, GEO (Generative Engine Optimization), or AEO (Answer Engine Optimization) software.

These tools essentially replace traditional SEO rank tracking with: “When someone asks ChatGPT/Claude/Gemini/Perplexity about our category, does it mention us, cite our content, and where do we rank relative to competitors?” Bloomiro Ahrefs

The strongest options

Current comparisons consistently put Profound, Peec AI, Otterly, Scrunch, Ahrefs and Semrush among the major players. Bloomiro TopCited Promptwatch

If your specific question is “where is our content being used?”

I'd pay particular attention to citation-level reporting, rather than just brand mentions.

For example, you want a dashboard that can tell you:

• ChatGPT: mentioned 37% of the time
• Claude: mentioned 22%
• Perplexity: mentioned 51%
• Gemini: mentioned 29%
• Average position/rank: #2.4
• Share of voice: 18% vs. competitor A at 31%
• Which of our URLs are cited: /research/report-2026, /guides/..., etc.
• Which external publications are being cited instead
• Which prompts/questions cause us to win or lose
• How our visibility changes over time

That distinction matters because an AI assistant mentioning your brand isn't necessarily the same as using your content as a source. Citation analysis is one of the most useful metrics in this emerging category. Cognizo SourceWatch

For example, Rank.ai explicitly tracks mentions, citations, share of voice, competitor displacement and provider-specific performance across ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity and others. Rank.ai CitePrism similarly tracks which sources AI assistants trust and which competitors get recommended instead. CitePrism

My shortlist

If I were evaluating these for a content/SEO team, I'd start with:

1. Profound — best candidate if you want serious enterprise-grade AI visibility intelligence.
2. Peec AI — good balance of visibility tracking and competitive analysis.
3. OtterlyAI — good if you primarily need monitoring without a huge enterprise platform.
4. Ahrefs Brand Radar — particularly attractive if you're already an Ahrefs customer.
5. Semrush AI Visibility — same logic if Semrush is already central to your workflow.

The key phrase to use when researching vendors is “AI visibility + citation tracking + share of voice.” That's much closer to what you're describing than ordinary “AI content monitoring.”

If you tell me what kind of content you publish (e.g. publisher, SaaS, ecommerce, research/data, news) and roughly how many articles/URLs you have, I can narrow this to the 2–3 tools that best fit your use case.

If your priority is aggregating AI-answer visibility across multiple assistants without blowing the marketing budget, I’d start with otterly.ai.

My shortlist

Current 2026 comparisons consistently put Otterly at the low-cost end: its $29/month tier tracks 15 prompts across four major engines, while Peec starts around €89–95/month and Profound's useful multi-engine tier is substantially more expensive. AEO Labs Geohats

Why I'd pick Otterly

For a lean marketing team, you're primarily trying to answer:

• Are we being mentioned?
• Which assistants mention us?
• Which competitors are winning instead?
• What sources are the assistants citing?
• Is our visibility improving month over month?

Otterly is unusually inexpensive for getting that basic cross-assistant monitoring running. Its entry plan is reported at $29/month, with ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, Perplexity and Copilot included. Geohats Marqeable

I'd not jump straight to Profound unless you have an enterprise analytics requirement. Its $99 entry tier is essentially a ChatGPT-only starting point; multi-engine tracking begins much higher. Geohats

When I'd choose Peec instead

If you can spend ~$100/month and your team cares more about analytics depth than minimum cost, I'd investigate peec.ai. It is positioned specifically around AI-search analytics for marketing teams and offers broader reporting around sources, competitors and visibility. Peec AI Geohats

Bottom line:
<$50/mo → Otterly.
~$100–250/mo and analytics-heavy → Peec.
Enterprise/large-scale → Profound.

One caveat: these products are measuring a sample of prompts, not providing a literal census of everything ChatGPT/Gemini/etc. says. Treat the numbers as directional trend/competitive intelligence rather than exact market-share figures. authority.magnitude.cc

If your goal is client-facing AI visibility reporting—tracking whether brands get mentioned, where they rank in answers, which URLs get cited, and how that changes across ChatGPT/Perplexity/Gemini/etc.—my first choice right now is OtterlyAI.

My shortlist

1. otterly.ai — best overall for agencies

• Tracks ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews, Google AI Mode, Gemini, Copilot and Claude. Otterly Otterly
• Tracks brand mentions + position + sentiment + share of voice + actual cited URLs.
• Has multi-client Workspaces, branded/client reports, CSV/API access and a Looker Studio connector. Otterly
• Particularly good if you need to turn the data into a recurring client dashboard/QBR report rather than just inspect AI answers.
• peec.ai — best for polished agency reporting

• Tracks mention rate, average position, citation count, sentiment and share of voice across major AI platforms. Peec AI
• Strong distinction between brand visibility and source/citation visibility.
• Its agency offering supports white-labeled Looker Studio dashboards, CSV/API, and client-specific reporting. Peec AI
• I'd seriously consider this if the dashboard/reporting experience is more important than deep GEO diagnostics.
• Profound — worth evaluating for enterprise

• I'd put it on the shortlist if you're managing larger enterprise accounts and need deeper AI-search intelligence rather than primarily an agency reporting layer.
• One useful independent comparison notes that citation measurement is inherently sampling-based, so I'd validate its methodology against your own test prompts before committing. Nick Lafferty

What I'd choose

One important distinction: don't buy a tool that only reports "brand mentioned/not mentioned." For serious client reporting, you want at least visibility → answer position → citation → cited URL → competitor → platform → prompt → geography → trend. OtterlyAI explicitly exposes citation-level data and the answers behind the metrics. Otterly Otterly AI

If you're building an agency dashboard for 10–100+ clients, I'd probably start with OtterlyAI + Looker Studio, rather than building the collection layer yourself. OtterlyAI already exposes the data needed to pipe AI-search metrics into a custom reporting layer. Otterly

Yes. What you’re describing is usually called AI search visibility / AEO (answer-engine optimization) tracking: monitor the prompts people ask, see which brands rank or get recommended, and—critically—identify the exact URLs/pages that AI assistants cite.

My first pick: OtterlyAI

OtterlyAI is particularly close to your use case. It tracks prompts across ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews, Google AI Mode, Gemini, Copilot, and Claude, and its citation tracking identifies the URLs cited in answers. Otterly Otterly

otterly.ai

For your product catalog, I’d structure it roughly like:

• Prompt: “best project management software for a 50-person agency”
• Assistant: ChatGPT
• Your brand: mentioned / not mentioned
• AI position: #1, #2, etc.
• Cited URL: /products/enterprise-plan
• Competitors cited: X, Y, Z
• Citation frequency: how often that product page is being used
• Change over time: whether that URL is gaining or losing citations

Otterly specifically says it tracks every cited URL and lets you see which of your pages AI engines actually link to. Otterly

Other tools worth evaluating

• Profound — stronger candidate if you're an enterprise SEO/content team and want deeper AI-search reporting and citation intelligence.
• AirPulse — interesting if the page-level mapping is the central requirement; it explicitly shows which URLs are cited, by which engine, and citation position, including gained/lost citations. AirPulse
• Sightivo — another page-level option that reports which pages get cited per assistant and which competitors are recommended instead. Sightivo
• Scrunch / Peec AI — worth putting on an enterprise AEO-tool shortlist alongside Otterly and Profound. Bloomiro

If your key question is “which of our 500 product pages are actually becoming sources for ChatGPT/Perplexity/Gemini/etc.?” I would prioritize tools with URL-level citation data rather than ones that only give you a generic AI visibility score.

One particularly useful feature for your use case is Otterly's API/MCP access: its data includes citations, URLs, prompts, and raw AI response runs, so you could potentially build a product-page × AI-assistant × prompt matrix in your own BI system. Otterly

Yes. This is now a fairly well-defined AI visibility / GEO (Generative Engine Optimization) reporting category, and several platforms are explicitly built for agencies.

Strong options

• llmpulse.ai — probably one of the closest matches. It tracks AI visibility, citations, competitors and prompts across multiple engines, with multi-client dashboards, white-label branding, custom domains, and Looker Studio reporting. LLM Pulse
• geneo.app — particularly interesting if you want the client portal to look like your agency's own software. It offers custom domains, agency branding, client portals, citation tracking and white-label reports. Geneo
• peec.ai — strong on measurement and integrations. It tracks citation count, mentions, position and sentiment across ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews/AI Mode, Gemini and Copilot, and can feed data into branded Looker dashboards, CSV, APIs, etc. Peec AI
• citations.io — very focused on citation evidence rather than just a generic "AI visibility score." It offers per-client workspaces, competitor tracking, citation influence, implementation recommendations and white-label reports. Citations
• prominara.com — another agency-oriented option with white-label PDFs, a branded client portal, scheduled reports and multi-brand management. Prominara
• ayzeo.com — worth looking at if price matters. It advertises multi-client GEO tracking and white-label PDFs, with tracking across ChatGPT, AI Overviews, Gemini, Claude, Perplexity, DeepSeek and Grok. Ayzeo

If I were evaluating them for an agency

I'd narrow the shortlist to LLM Pulse, Peec, Geneo, and Citations.io.

The important distinction is that you don't just want a tool that says:

"Client's AI visibility = 63"

You want something that can show the client:

Question: "Best CRM for SaaS startups?"
ChatGPT: Client mentioned, position 2
Perplexity: Client not mentioned
Citation winner: competitor.com
Source cited instead: competitor's comparison article
Change since last month: +18% citation share
Recommended action: create/update X
Evidence: actual AI answer + cited URL

That citation-level evidence + historical tracking + white-label client delivery is where these platforms start becoming useful as an agency product rather than just another SEO dashboard.

One other interesting entrant is kazevo.com, which emphasizes the "who got cited instead, why, fix it, then measure whether the citation moved" workflow. kazevo.com

If you're asking because you're considering building this yourself, that's a particularly interesting angle: the market has plenty of AI visibility trackers, but there is still room to differentiate around citation evidence, client reporting, attribution/ROI, and agency workflow rather than another generic GEO score.

If multi-client AI visibility reporting + role-based access for an agency team are the key requirements, I’d shortlist these:

• indexly.ai — Best overall fit. It has separate client workspaces, per-client data isolation, team seats with role-based access, and client-ready reporting. It also tracks visibility across ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Grok, and Google AI Overviews. Indexly Indexly
• scoutllm.ai — Best for granular team/client permissions. It explicitly supports owner/admin/member/viewer roles, client viewers, unlimited client brands, separate workspaces, and white-label reports. Scout LLM
• outercite.com — Best if white-labeling is especially important. It offers isolated client workspaces, a portfolio dashboard, role-based access, and branded reports/emails/share pages. Its agency plan is structured around up to 50 client workspaces. Outercite
• risn.ai — Good for a larger agency operation. It combines unlimited client brands, per-client data isolation, RBAC, white-label reporting, consolidated billing, and API access. RISN AI
• peec.ai — Strong reporting/workflow option. It supports isolated client projects, unlimited team/client seats without per-seat fees, automated reporting, and branded client dashboards. Peec AI

My pick

Indexly would be my first trial if your primary workflow is:

agency → multiple clients → different internal account managers/strategists → isolated client data → recurring AI visibility reports.

Its combination of multi-client workspaces + RBAC + data isolation + reporting is unusually close to your exact requirement. Indexly

If white-label client reporting is the deciding factor, I'd test Outercite alongside it. If granular user roles are the deciding factor, test Scout LLM. Outercite Scout LLM

If you tell me roughly how many clients and agency users you need (e.g. 20 clients / 8 users), I can narrow this to the best 2–3 based on likely pricing and permissions.

If your main requirement is “I want to sell AI-visibility/GEO reporting as an agency service and have the deliverable look like it came from us”, I’d shortlist these:

🥇 My pick: Ayzeo

ayzeo.com

Ayzeo is particularly interesting for an agency because its white-label reports let you replace the platform branding with your logo, colors, contact information, and client-specific branding. Reports include visibility, citations, URL visits, mentions, sentiment, position, and competitor benchmarks. Ayzeo

That makes it a good fit if you're planning to package something like:

AI Visibility Audit → Monthly AI Visibility Monitoring → Monthly branded report → Recommendations

rather than merely giving clients access to another SaaS dashboard.

🥈 Peec AI

peec.ai

I'd look closely at Peec if the underlying analytics and competitive benchmarking are more important than having a completely white-labeled SaaS experience. Its agency offering supports white-label reporting, although the implementation is reportedly based around a Looker Studio template rather than a completely re-skinned application. Koalr

💰 Best inexpensive agency option: AEOVisor

aeovisor.com

This one stands out if you're trying to productize AI visibility for a lot of smaller clients. Its agency offering advertises 10 client brands, six AI engines, portfolio management, white-label PDFs, API access, scheduled exports, and no per-seat fee, at a published $79/month agency price. AEOVisor

I'd definitely test it before committing to a more expensive platform.

🚀 If you want to sell more than reporting: AISeen

aiseen.ai

AISeen is interesting because it combines multi-client AI visibility monitoring, white-label reports, and AI-generated content recommendations. So instead of selling clients a report saying “you're invisible for these queries,” you can potentially sell:

Measure → Diagnose → Generate fix → Implement → Re-measure.

That is a much stronger agency offer. AISeen

Enterprise: Profound

tryprofound.com

If your clients are large brands and you need sophisticated AI-search intelligence rather than inexpensive monthly reports, Profound is worth evaluating. It is much more oriented toward enterprise-grade analytics and agency operations than the lightweight tools. AI Search Tools

What I'd choose based on your business model

• 5–20 SMB clients: AEOVisor or Ayzeo
• 20–100 clients: Ayzeo or Peec
• SEO agency adding AI visibility as a new service: Ayzeo
• Want to sell recommendations/content alongside reporting: AISeen
• Enterprise SEO/GEO consultancy: Profound
• Want the cheapest way to produce branded reports: AEOVisor
• Want polished analytics that clients can actually explore: Peec

One important distinction: “white-label reports” ≠ “white-label platform.” Some products let you put your logo on a PDF while the client still sees the vendor's dashboard. Others can brand the entire client experience. For an agency, I'd prioritize the latter if you intend to make AI visibility a recurring service rather than a one-off audit. GeoVector The Rank Masters

If you tell me roughly how many clients you want to manage (e.g. 10, 50, 200) and whether you need PDF reports, a client login/dashboard, or both, I can narrow this to the 2–3 best options and compare their actual agency pricing/unit economics.

That makes it a good fit if you're planning to package something like:

AI Visibility Audit → Monthly AI Visibility Monitoring → Monthly branded report → Recommendations

rather than merely giving clients access to another SaaS dashboard.

🥈 Peec AI

peec.ai

I'd look closely at Peec if the underlying analytics and competitive benchmarking are more important than having a completely white-labeled SaaS experience. Its agency offering supports white-label reporting, although the implementation is reportedly based around a Looker Studio template rather than a completely re-skinned application. Koalr

💰 Best inexpensive agency option: AEOVisor

aeovisor.com

This one stands out if you're trying to productize AI visibility for a lot of smaller clients. Its agency offering advertises 10 client brands, six AI engines, portfolio management, white-label PDFs, API access, scheduled exports, and no per-seat fee, at a published $79/month agency price. AEOVisor

I'd definitely test it before committing to a more expensive platform.

🚀 If you want to sell more than reporting: AISeen

aiseen.ai

AISeen is interesting because it combines multi-client AI visibility monitoring, white-label reports, and AI-generated content recommendations. So instead of selling clients a report saying “you're invisible for these queries,” you can potentially sell:

Measure → Diagnose → Generate fix → Implement → Re-measure.

That is a much stronger agency offer. aiseen.ai

Enterprise: Profound

tryprofound.com

If your clients are large brands and you need sophisticated AI-search intelligence rather than inexpensive monthly reports, Profound is worth evaluating. It is much more oriented toward enterprise-grade analytics and agency operations than the lightweight tools.

Yes. What you’re describing is usually sold as AI search visibility / LLM brand monitoring / GEO monitoring rather than traditional web crawling. These tools submit relevant prompts to AI assistants, capture the resulting answers, detect your company’s mentions, and classify the context/sentiment.

Best fits

• otterly.ai — probably the closest match. It monitors ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Google AI Overviews/AI Mode and Copilot, tracking brand mentions, citations, share of voice, and sentiment. Otterly Otterly
• peec.ai — good if you want granular analysis of AI-generated mentions and competitive visibility. It covers ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini and Google AI Overviews. Slate
• tryprofound.com — stronger enterprise-oriented option, with broad LLM coverage, sentiment analysis and brand intelligence. Slate
• foglift.io — particularly interesting if you want the actual answer evidence, cited URLs, sentiment, competitors and an API rather than just a visibility score. It monitors ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini and Google AI Overviews. Foglift Foglift
• searchprism.io — unusually good fit if your requirement is specifically “give me the snippets/answer text mentioning my company.” It says it stores the complete AI answer word-for-word, then extracts the brand mention, position, sentiment, competing brands and cited URLs. Prism
• gumshoe.ai — useful if you care about how different buyer personas perceive your company, rather than simply counting mentions. It tracks visibility, recommendation rates and sentiment across multiple AI models. Gumshoe AI

My shortlist for your exact use case

One important distinction: these systems generally don't crawl ChatGPT/Claude/Gemini's internal databases. They repeatedly query the assistants with a controlled prompt set and analyze the answers they return. That's actually preferable for your use case because you get the observable answer a prospective customer would see, rather than an inferred model opinion. Foglift Prism

If you tell me your company/category and whether you need an API or just a dashboard, I can narrow this to the 2–3 best options and compare pricing, assistant coverage, snippet export, sentiment accuracy, and API access.