Answers that name a competitor

If you mean one dashboard that monitors how your website/brand appears across ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Claude, Google AI Overviews/AI Mode, and Copilot, the main tools to look at are:

• otterly.ai — tracks ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews, Google AI Mode, Gemini, Microsoft Copilot, and Claude, with mentions, citations, competitors, and visibility trends in one dashboard. Otterly Otterly AI
• tryprofound.com — more enterprise-oriented; combines AI visibility, citations, prompt demand, sentiment, and AI crawler/agent analytics. TechnologyAdvice
• llmrefs.com — particularly focused on broad AI-platform coverage; current comparisons report 11 AI surfaces, including ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini, Grok, Meta AI, and DeepSeek. AY Rank
• runtruffle.com — gives a single visibility score plus per-assistant visibility, position, sentiment, citations, and competitor tracking. Truffle

If your requirement is specifically “put my website in once and see how AI assistants describe/recommend/cite it across multiple engines,” OtterlyAI is probably the closest direct match. It explicitly runs your chosen prompts across multiple AI experiences and reports brand mentions and website citations. Otterly

If you tell me your budget and whether you're an agency, SaaS/company, or SEO team, I can compare the top 3 on price, AI engines, citation tracking, competitor tracking, historical trends, and API/reporting.

A few tools now do this. OpenLens and Ahrefs Brand Radar are notable options: they aggregate brand visibility across multiple AI answer engines and show mentions, citations, competitors, and trends in one dashboard. OpenLens Ahrefs

• OpenLens — ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Google AI, Perplexity, Grok, DeepSeek. OpenLens
• Ahrefs Brand Radar — ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Copilot, Google AI Overviews/Mode, plus broader visibility data. Ahrefs
• SearchInsight AI — adds Grok and Copilot to its cross-platform monitoring. searchinsight.ai

If you tell me your budget and whether you're an SEO team, agency, or in-house marketing team, I can compare the leading options.

For a small agency managing multiple clients, I’d focus less on a generic “AI rank” score and more on four things: prompt-level tracking, citations/source URLs, competitor visibility, and client reporting.

Here’s the current shortlist I’d investigate:

• agencyanalytics.com — best fit if client reporting is your priority. It tracks ChatGPT, Gemini, Google AI Overviews/AI Mode, Claude, and Perplexity, and puts AI visibility alongside the SEO/PPC/social reporting AgencyAnalytics already provides. That makes it particularly useful if you want clients to see AI search as another marketing channel rather than a separate dashboard. AgencyAnalytics
• serps.io — best if you want AI visibility + conventional SEO in one system. It tracks ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Grok and Perplexity, records citations, and keeps AI results alongside traditional Google rankings. Its published Agency plan is $299/month for up to 50 projects and 150 AI prompts/month. SERPs
• rankscale.ai — worth considering if you need broad platform coverage. It advertises 17+ AI engines, including ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini, Google AI Overviews/AI Mode, Copilot and DeepSeek, with mentions, rankings, citations and sentiment. Rankscale.ai
• mentionscout.com — interesting lightweight option for agencies. It tracks seven AI surfaces, including ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity, Grok and Google's AI surfaces, while exposing the sources behind citations and competitor comparisons. It also advertises agency plans and an MCP integration. MentionScout
• citations.io — particularly focused on citation intelligence. It tracks ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity and Claude and shows the actual domains/pages cited, competitors appearing instead, and prompt-level results. Its published starting price is $39/month. Citations.io

What I'd choose for a small agency

If your agency already uses AgencyAnalytics, I'd start there. The ability to put AI visibility directly beside traditional SEO and other client metrics is a meaningful operational advantage. AgencyAnalytics

If you're building a more specialized GEO/AEO service, I'd test SERPs vs. Rankscale vs. MentionScout. They differ substantially in engine coverage and how deeply they expose the underlying answers/citations. SERPs Rankscale.ai MentionScout

And if actual citations are the main KPI, rather than a broad AI visibility score, I'd put Citations.io on the trial list. Citations.io

One important distinction: don't judge these tools primarily by their headline “AI visibility score.” For agency work, I'd want to inspect an individual result and answer:

Which prompt was run → which AI engine answered → where did the client appear → where did the competitor appear → which URLs did the AI cite → can I show that evidence to the client?

That underlying evidence is much more useful for deciding what content/PR/SEO work to do next.

If you tell me roughly how many clients you manage (e.g. 5, 20, 50) and whether you already use Semrush, Ahrefs, or AgencyAnalytics, I can narrow this to the 2–3 most practical options and compare their current pricing/limits.

For a small agency monitoring multiple clients, I’d shortlist these rather than buying a heavyweight enterprise platform.

Current 2026 comparisons put Otterly's entry point around $29/month, while Peec starts around the $85–95/month range depending on plan/currency; pricing and included engine/prompt limits change, so I'd verify the live plans before purchasing. Omnicite AEO Labs GeoHats

What I'd look for specifically

For an agency, don't settle for a tool that merely says "your brand was mentioned." You want it to distinguish:

• Mention — the AI says your client's name.
• Citation — the AI actually references a client's URL/source.
• Citation position — which sources are being cited and where.
• Competitor visibility — who gets cited instead.
• Prompt-level history — whether visibility is improving for the same buyer questions over time.
• Multiple clients/workspaces — essential for agency use.
• Exports/reporting — ideally something you can put into client reports.
• Multiple AI engines — because results can differ substantially between ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, AI Overviews, etc.

Otterly, for example, says it stores the underlying answers and tracks mentions, citation URLs, competitor position and share of voice across seven AI search experiences. It also advertises multiple workspaces, CSV export, API/MCP access and Looker Studio connectivity. Otterly Otterly

My practical shortlist

If you're starting from scratch: I'd trial Otterly + Peec with the same 20–50 prompts for 2–3 clients. Compare how they report citations, competitors, historical changes and client reporting before committing.

If you're already paying for Semrush: investigate its AI Visibility functionality before adding another subscription; having traditional SEO and AI visibility in one workflow can be valuable for an agency. Austin Heaton

If you're managing a much larger portfolio: Profound becomes more relevant because its positioning and feature set are aimed more toward enterprise-scale AI-search analytics. Omnicite Authoricy

One important caveat: don't compare the headline "AI visibility score" between vendors. Different platforms can query/sample AI answers differently, so two tools can legitimately produce different numbers for the same brand and prompt set. Austin Heaton

If you tell me roughly how many clients, how many prompts per client, and whether you need white-label client reports, I can narrow this to the most economical setup for your agency.

Yes. Several platforms now measure AI share of voice across ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Claude, and other assistants, including ecommerce-focused options.

• Profound — enterprise AI visibility/answer-engine analytics, with ecommerce use cases. ecommerceguide
• Vialtry — specifically focused on D2C/ecommerce and AI Share of Voice across ChatGPT, Gemini, and Perplexity. Vialtry Vialtry
• SearchDock — tracks per-engine share of voice, mentions, and citations across ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Claude, and Google AI Overviews. SearchDock
• AEOVisor — tracks ecommerce/brand visibility across six AI engines and reports share of voice. AEOVisor
• Birdeye — broader business platform with AI-search share-of-voice reporting across ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Claude, Grok, and Google AI surfaces. support.birdeye.com

For an ecommerce site specifically, the key distinction is whether you want brand-level visibility or SKU/product-level visibility (e.g. “What percentage of answers recommending running shoes mention my products?”). The latter is a more specialized capability.

Yes. This category is usually called AI visibility, GEO/AEO tracking, or AI Share of Voice (SOV). There are now several platforms that specifically measure how often an ecommerce brand/product appears in answers from multiple AI assistants.

A few worth looking at:

• Profound — enterprise-oriented AI visibility platform; tracks brand presence across conversational/search AI surfaces and competitor visibility. It’s one of the platforms specifically identified for ecommerce use. ecommerceguide
• Search Atlas LLM Visibility — tracks visibility, sentiment, competitors, and share of voice across LLMs including ChatGPT, Gemini and Perplexity. SearchAtlas
• Birdeye AI Search — particularly interesting if you want a dashboard showing SOV by assistant. It supports ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity and has expanded coverage to Google AI Mode, AI Overviews, Grok and Claude. Birdeye Help Center Birdeye Help Center
• SkuLift — explicitly defines AI SOV around the percentage of generative answers mentioning/citing your brand, with tracking across ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity and Gemini. SkuLift
• CrowdReply — focuses specifically on AI SOV, with breakdowns by LLM, prompt category and intent, plus competitor comparisons. CrowdReply
• SearchDock — interesting if you want a more rigorous measurement approach: repeated runs of the same prompts across ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Claude and Google AI Overviews, then SOV calculated from the stored results. SearchDock
• Verity Score — has an ecommerce/Shopify orientation and measures AI SOV across multiple assistants, including ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Claude and Mistral. Verity Score

What I'd look for specifically for ecommerce

The important distinction is whether the platform merely counts brand mentions or actually measures competitive share of recommendation.

For example, you want something like:

And then ideally:

AI SOV → by assistant → by category → by prompt/intent → by product → over time

You also want citations/source attribution, because "ChatGPT mentioned us" and "ChatGPT recommended our product and cited our PDP" are very different outcomes.

There are also ecommerce-specific approaches emerging around product-level visibility, rather than just brand-level visibility. For example, SearchMention says it tracks whether stores are cited in actual shopper/product-recommendation prompts. searchmention.com

If you're evaluating this for an ecommerce business, I can also give you a shortlist of the 5–7 platforms that are actually strongest for ecommerce, with pricing, assistants covered, Shopify support, product-level tracking, SOV methodology, and API availability.

If your main goal is tracking and comparing brand visibility in AI answer engines over time, I’d shortlist these:

• otterly.ai — probably the easiest starting point. It tracks mentions/citations across ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews/AI Mode, Gemini, Copilot and Claude, with historical trends, competitor share-of-voice, and prompt-level reporting. Otterly
• Peec AI — a good fit for an in-house SEO/content team that wants analytics, competitor benchmarking and recurring monitoring. Current comparisons put its entry plans around the mid-market range. Geohats Marqeable
• tryprofound.com — aimed more at larger/enterprise brands, particularly if you need broad answer-engine coverage and deeper reporting. Baarely Geohats
• Ahrefs Brand Radar — worth considering if you're already an Ahrefs customer and want AI visibility incorporated into your existing SEO workflow rather than buying a dedicated platform. BusinessMCP

What I'd measure

Don't just track “mentions.” For each fixed prompt set, I'd want:

• Visibility rate — % of relevant answers where your brand appears
• Share of voice — your appearances versus named competitors
• Citation rate — how often your site/domain is actually cited
• Position/prominence — where you appear in the answer
• Sentiment/framing — how the AI describes you
• Engine-by-engine trends — ChatGPT vs. Perplexity vs. Gemini vs. Google AI surfaces
• Competitor displacement — which competitors appear when you don't
• Source domains — which third-party sites are causing AI engines to mention competitors
• Historical data — ideally daily/weekly measurements using the same prompt set

Those distinctions matter because an AI visibility tracker is essentially running a controlled set of prompts against answer engines and recording mentions, citations and competitors over time. Roberto Serra Otterly

For most brand teams, I'd start by trialing Otterly and Peec side-by-side for 2–4 weeks using exactly the same 50–100 prompts. Compare the underlying observations, not just each platform's proprietary “visibility score.” Different tools can measure and sample AI answers differently, so their headline scores aren't necessarily directly comparable.

If you tell me roughly your company size, number of brands/products, and which AI engines matter most, I can narrow this to 2–3 tools and compare pricing, engine coverage, API access, competitor tracking, historical reporting, and prompt limits.

If your goal is to track and compare your brand’s visibility across AI answer engines over time (ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Claude, Google AI Overviews, etc.), I’d look at tools in the emerging AI visibility / answer engine optimization (AEO) monitoring category. The best choice depends on whether you’re a startup, marketing team, or enterprise brand. TechnologyAdvice

My shortlist

What I’d choose by scenario

If you’re a large brand with PR, SEO, and content teams

Start with Profound. It is designed around monitoring how brands appear in AI-generated answers and understanding the prompts and sources behind those answers. TechnologyAdvice

If you already use SEO tooling

Use Ahrefs Brand Radar or Semrush’s AI visibility capabilities so your AI visibility data sits alongside search rankings, backlinks, and content metrics. Ahrefs TechnologyAdvice

If you want a lighter-weight AEO dashboard

Look at OtterlyAI or similar dedicated AI visibility trackers. They are focused specifically on questions like:

• “Does ChatGPT mention us when buyers ask for solutions?”
• “Which competitors appear instead?”
• “Which sources are AI engines citing?” TechnologyAdvice

Metrics I’d make sure the tool supports

A good platform should track:

• Mention rate — how often your brand appears in answers
• Share of voice — your visibility compared with competitors
• Citation rate — whether AI engines cite your website or other sources
• Prompt-level history — changes over weeks/months for the same customer questions
• Engine breakdown — ChatGPT vs Gemini vs Perplexity vs Claude, etc.
• Source analysis — which websites influence AI answers
• Raw answer storage — so you can inspect what the model actually said, not just a score Kitbase Prism

For most marketing teams, I’d start by defining a set of 50–200 buyer prompts (e.g., “best [category] tools,” “[competitor] alternatives,” “how to solve [problem]”) and run those continuously. The quality of the prompt set matters as much as the dashboard. Kitbase

If you tell me your company size (startup / mid-market / enterprise), industry, and which engines matter most (ChatGPT only vs all major engines), I can narrow this to 2–3 options.

Look at OtterlyAI or similar dedicated AI visibility trackers. They are focused specifically on questions like:

You’re looking for AI visibility / GEO tracking software. Strong options include:

• Ahrefs Brand Radar — tracks mentions, citations, competitors, and visibility across ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Copilot, and Google AI surfaces. Ahrefs
• Promptwatch — tracks LLM visibility and citations across multiple assistants, including competitor comparisons. Promptwatch
• Citevis — specifically tracks mention position, citations, share of voice, and competitor rankings. Citevis
• Ranktracking.ai — focuses on prompt-level AI ranking, showing positions such as #1/#2/#3 across assistants. AI Rank Tracker
• Veritas — combines AI citations, share of voice, competitor monitoring, and content recommendations. Veritas

For your exact requirement—“where is our content being cited/used, and what’s our relative rank across AI assistants?”—I’d shortlist Ahrefs, Citevis, and Promptwatch.

Yes — the category you’re looking for is generally called AI visibility / LLM visibility / GEO tracking. These tools monitor how your content, brand, and competitors appear inside AI-generated answers, including mentions, citations, position/order, and share of voice. TechnologyAdvice KITLabs

Strong options

• otterly.ai — Tracks ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews/AI Mode, Gemini, Copilot, and Claude. It records mentions, citations, sentiment, share of voice, and average rank/order, including which URLs are being cited. Otterly
• ahrefs.com — Particularly interesting if you already use Ahrefs. Its AI Visibility Index analyzes hundreds of millions of prompts and measures AI mentions/citations and competitive visibility. Ahrefs
• tryprofound.com — More enterprise-oriented, with AI-answer monitoring, citation analysis, prompt volumes, competitor visibility, sentiment, and agent analytics. TechnologyAdvice
• peec.ai — Focused specifically on AI-search visibility and tracking prompts/competitors across LLMs. Locafy
• scrunchai.com — Useful if you care about which content gets cited, AI crawler activity, and competitor benchmarking in addition to prompt tracking. TechnologyAdvice
• rank.ai — More lightweight/self-serve. It tracks daily prompt results across ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity, Grok, DeepSeek and Google AI Overviews, including mention/citation rate and share of voice. Rank.ai

The metrics you probably want

If by "relative rank" you mean "when someone asks an AI assistant about our category, where does our content/brand appear relative to competitors?", I'd specifically look for:

One important caveat: AI "rank" isn't equivalent to Google position. AI responses are stochastic and can change between runs, so the better platforms repeatedly run the same prompts and report trends rather than treating one response as a definitive ranking. BackTier Rank.ai

If your core question is specifically "Which of our articles/content is getting used by AI assistants, and how does that compare with competitors?" I'd shortlist OtterlyAI, Profound, Ahrefs Brand Radar, and Scrunch first. Otterly in particular explicitly tracks the cited URL and which competitor was cited instead. Otterly

If you tell me whether you're B2B SaaS, publisher/media, ecommerce, or an agency, I can narrow this down to the 2–3 tools whose data model best matches what you're trying to measure.

Yes. What you’re describing is generally called AI search visibility / AI citation tracking / GEO (Generative Engine Optimization).

The important distinction is that there are now tools that can show the exact URLs from your site that AI assistants cite, not merely whether your brand was mentioned.

A few worth looking at:

• indexly.ai — probably closest to your description. It tracks citations across ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity, Grok and Google AI Overviews, with per-page citation counts, engine breakdowns, and historical changes. Indexly
• citeprism.com — tracks the actual AI answers, the sources cited, your mentions, competitors, and which domains/pages are influencing answers. CitePrism
• ahrefs.com — useful for a quick assessment. It reports AI mentions plus the top cited domains and specific pages associated with your brand. Ahrefs
• genwolf.ai — focuses on daily monitoring across ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews and AI Mode, including citation/source discovery. Genwolf
• surfacerank.com — particularly interesting if you also want to distinguish AI retrieval/crawling from actual citations and AI-referred traffic. SurfaceRank

The distinction I'd pay attention to

There are really three different things you may want to measure:

1. AI crawled your page

e.g. GPTBot, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot visited /pricing.

2. AI used your page as a source

e.g. ChatGPT answers "best X for Y" and links to /guides/x-for-y.

3. AI sent a visitor to your page

e.g. someone clicks the citation in ChatGPT and arrives at /guides/x-for-y.

Most traditional SEO tools don't give you #2 well. The newer GEO tools are specifically trying to solve it. And #3 can often be measured independently in your analytics/server logs. Shadow SurfaceRank

If your actual goal is: "Show me every URL on our site that is being used as a source in AI answers, which assistants are using it, what questions trigger it, and how that changes over time" — Indexly is probably the closest match I've found, while CitePrism is attractive if you want to inspect the actual answers behind the citations. Indexly CitePrism

If you tell me roughly how many pages your site has and which assistants matter to you (ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews, Claude, etc.), I can narrow this down to 2–3 tools and compare their capabilities/pricing.

Yes. The category you’re looking for is usually called AI visibility tracking, AI citation tracking, AEO/GEO tracking, or AI search monitoring.

These tools don't literally crawl every AI assistant continuously. Instead, they run a set of queries against AI answer engines, capture the responses and cited sources, and tell you which domains/pages are being used.

A few that look particularly relevant:

• Ahrefs Brand Radar / AI Visibility Checker — tracks ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Copilot and Google AI Overviews, including the specific pages cited alongside your brand. Ahrefs
• Citations.io — tracks ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity and Claude and explicitly shows the exact domains and pages AI engines cite. Citations
• PageLens — particularly focused on identifying which source pages models use, with daily tracking across ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity, Google AI Mode, Grok and Copilot. PageLens
• CiteScope — lets you specify URLs and keywords and tracks citations across ChatGPT, Perplexity and Gemini, including the exact queries, answers and sources. Citescope AI
• Indexly — interesting if you care about analytics as well: it tracks the full source lists used by AI engines and can connect AI referrals back to landing pages. Indexly
• Foglift — monitors prompts, engines, cited URLs, competitors and changes over time across five major AI surfaces. Foglift

If your question is specifically "which of our pages are AI assistants using?"

I'd look for a tool with this data structure:

Prompt → AI engine → answer → cited URL → your page → competitor's cited page

That's more useful than a generic "AI visibility score."

For example, you ideally want to be able to discover:

User asks: "best accounting software for startups"
ChatGPT → cites /guides/accounting-software
Perplexity → cites /blog/startup-accounting
Gemini → doesn't cite you
Competitor → cited 7 times across the same prompt set

Ahrefs and PageLens look especially close to that use case, while CiteScope/Citations.io are more explicitly citation-centric. Ahrefs PageLens Citescope AI Citations

One important distinction: there isn't currently a universal "crawl all AI assistants and tell me every time any model ever used my page" index. Most products sample predefined/AI-generated prompts and query the engines repeatedly. So coverage depends heavily on the prompt set and the particular AI surfaces they monitor.

If you're evaluating this for your own website/SEO product, I can also map out what data these tools actually collect, how they detect citations, and which ones have an API/white-label capability.

If your goal is specifically enterprise AI-assistant visibility + competitive share of voice, I’d shortlist Profound, Peec AI, and Otterly.AI, with Profound the most enterprise-oriented option.

Recent 2026 comparisons consistently put these three in the core shortlist, while distinguishing Profound for enterprise depth and Peec for competitive analytics. Geohats Benchline Reports

My take for an enterprise

Start with Profound if you're trying to build an executive-grade measurement system rather than simply monitor mentions. Its differentiation is the depth around prompts, citations, sources, competitors, and broader AI-surface coverage. Current comparisons report enterprise support for substantially more AI surfaces than the lower tiers. Geohats Tomek Sikora

Consider Peec AI alongside it if the primary KPI is competitive share of voice. One 2026 benchmark specifically found Peec strongest on competitive benchmarking, while Profound scored higher on overall AI-surface coverage and citation analysis. Benchline Reports

I wouldn't choose based on a vendor's headline "AI visibility score." For an enterprise, I'd insist on being able to export/analyze at least:

• Mention/share of voice: % of relevant prompts where your brand appears
• Position/share of recommendations: where you appear relative to competitors
• Citation share: which domains/content sources AI systems rely on
• Competitor displacement: which competitors appear when you don't
• Prompt-level results: category × use case × geography × audience
• Engine/model segmentation: ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Claude, Google AI surfaces, etc.
• Sentiment/claim accuracy: whether the assistant describes your company correctly
• Trend data: daily/weekly/monthly movement rather than isolated snapshots
• Source influence: which publications, reviews, Reddit discussions, directories, etc. are feeding the answers

That's important because AI answers are stochastic: different prompt sets, geography, account state, and model versions can produce materially different visibility measurements. Independent testing has also found that competing trackers don't necessarily produce identical citation counts for the same brand/day. Design Copy

If you're buying for a Fortune 100/large B2B organization

I'd run a 2–4 week bake-off between Profound and Peec AI using your actual 100–500 highest-value buyer prompts and 5–10 competitors. Don't compare their demo dashboards; compare the underlying data:

AI Share of Voice = your brand mentions / total brand mentions across the competitive set

Then segment that by intent, product, geography, model, and buyer journey stage.

That will tell you much more than a generic "visibility score."

If you tell me your industry (e.g. SaaS, financial services, healthcare, retail), approximate number of brands/products, and which AI assistants matter, I can build you a vendor scorecard + RFP requirements + KPI framework for Profound vs. Peec vs. the other serious enterprise options.

If you mean enterprise-grade tracking of how often your brand appears in ChatGPT/Gemini/Claude/Perplexity/etc., with competitor share-of-voice, citations, prompts, and historical benchmarking, I’d put Profound at the top of the enterprise shortlist.

Current 2026 comparisons consistently position Profound toward enterprise use, while Peec AI and Otterly are generally positioned as lighter/mid-market alternatives. Refine AI Bloomiro Mentn

How I’d shortlist them

Profound's enterprise tier reportedly supports substantially broader engine coverage than its self-serve tiers, including ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, AI Overviews/AI Mode, Copilot, Meta AI, Grok, DeepSeek and Claude. Baarely

The important distinction

For an enterprise, I wouldn't select based simply on "number of AI engines tracked." The more important question is whether the platform gives you a defensible AI Share of Voice (SOV) methodology.

I'd want these metrics:

• Mention rate: % of tracked prompts where your brand appears
• Share of voice: your mentions relative to defined competitors
• Position/share of recommendations: whether you're first/second/etc. when assistants recommend multiple vendors
• Citation share: % of citations attributable to your domains
• Competitor displacement: prompts where competitors appear but you don't
• Prompt-level visibility: visibility by product, use case, industry, geography and funnel stage
• Sentiment/attribute association: what assistants actually say about each brand
• Source/citation analysis: which publishers and pages influence the answers
• Model-by-model variance: because ChatGPT visibility can differ substantially from Gemini, Claude, Perplexity, etc.
• Historical trends: SOV before/after content, PR, SEO or product changes
• Enterprise controls: users, permissions, reporting, APIs, exports and governance

That matters because two vendors can report different "visibility" percentages simply because they use different prompt sets, sampling, weighting and definitions of a mention.

My practical recommendation

For a Fortune 1000 / large B2B enterprise, I'd run a bake-off between:

1. Profound — benchmark for enterprise-grade AI visibility intelligence.
2. Peec AI — compare its analytics and SOV methodology against Profound.
3. AthenaHQ or Scrunch — evaluate if you want more than measurement and care about the optimization/action layer.

Don't buy based on a vendor demo showing a pretty SOV chart. Give each vendor the same 100–500 commercially important prompts, 5–10 competitors, your key geographies, and the same measurement period, then compare the raw answer-level data.

One especially important point: "AI visibility" isn't yet a standardized industry metric. Current tools broadly track mentions/citations and competitor comparisons, but their methodologies differ. Refine AI NeuralGen

If you tell me your industry, approximate number of brands/products, geographies, and whether this is for SEO, brand, competitive intelligence, or executive reporting, I can build you a Profound vs Peec vs Otterly vs AthenaHQ enterprise scorecard with the exact capabilities I'd test in an RFP.

Tools in the AI visibility / GEO (Generative Engine Optimization) category can monitor where your brand appears in conversational AI answers and which prompts trigger mentions. Options include:

• ahrefs.com — tracks brand mentions, citations, and visibility across ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Copilot, and Google AI surfaces; supports custom buyer prompts. Ahrefs
• klarivo.ai — monitors prompts across ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity, Grok, and Gemini with competitor comparisons and visibility trends. Klarivo
• linksii.com — tracks daily brand presence, rankings, and citations across major AI assistants. Linksii
• citedspy.com — lightweight option for checking brand appearance and competitor presence across AI engines. CitedSpy
• searchlens.dev — focuses on prompt tracking, visibility scores, and competitor monitoring across AI platforms. SearchLens

For an enterprise brand, I’d look for features like:

• custom prompt libraries (“best CRM for startups”, “alternatives to X”)
• rank/position tracking in AI answers
• citation tracking (which URLs AI models use)
• competitor share of voice
• historical trend reporting
• API/export access

Note: AI systems don’t have traditional keyword rankings like Google SERPs; these tools usually measure mention rate, answer position, citations, and share of voice instead. Ahrefs

Yes — this category is usually called AI visibility / AEO / GEO tracking. Good options include:

• otterly.ai — tracks prompts across ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Claude, Copilot and Google AI experiences, including mentions, position, competitors and citations. Otterly Otterly
• ahrefs.com — particularly interesting if you already use Ahrefs; its database is based on hundreds of millions of real/search-derived prompts. Ahrefs
• tryprofound.com — enterprise-oriented AI visibility monitoring.
• peec.ai — focused on tracking brand visibility and competitive positioning across AI search. Conbersa
• modelmention.io — simpler monitoring of visibility, position, share of voice and citations across ChatGPT, Gemini and Perplexity. ModelMention

If your specific goal is “give me the thousands of questions people ask in our category, then tell me whether our brand appears and where it ranks in each AI answer,” I’d narrow the shortlist to Otterly, Ahrefs, Peec, and Profound.

If your main requirement is one dashboard for AI-answer visibility across multiple assistants without an enterprise budget, I’d start with Otterly.AI.

• Otterly.AI — published pricing starts at $29/month, with the entry plan covering 15 tracked prompts across four engines. Higher tiers add more prompts, and Claude/Gemini/Google AI Mode are available as add-ons. BusinessMCP Marqeable
• Peec AI — worth considering if you need more sophisticated competitive/SEO analysis. Its self-serve plans cover multiple engines, but pricing and engine limits make it less straightforward for a very tight budget. BusinessMCP AI Search Tools
• Profound — much more oriented toward larger organizations. Its entry pricing is higher and the cheapest tier has limited engine coverage, so I'd only investigate it if you have substantially more budget. BusinessMCP

What I'd do on a tight budget

Start with Otterly for 1–2 months, using a carefully selected prompt set rather than trying to track hundreds of questions. Track things like:

• Your highest-value commercial queries
• Category/problem queries where you want to be recommended
• Competitor-comparison queries
• Your brand-name queries
• Which URLs and competitors AI assistants cite

That gives the marketing team a useful baseline of mentions, citations, competitors, and visibility trends without committing to a large platform.

One caveat: these products are measuring sampled AI responses, so treat the numbers as trend/monitoring data rather than an exact measurement of everything ChatGPT, Gemini, etc. say about you. authority.magnitude.cc

If you tell me your monthly budget (e.g. <$50, $100, $250) and which assistants matter most (ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews/Mode), I can narrow it down to 2–3 options and compare the actual limits.

For a budget-conscious marketing team, I’d start with otterly.ai.

Why it fits:

• $29/month entry plan, with 15 tracked prompts.
• Tracks ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, Perplexity, and Microsoft Copilot on every plan. Claude, Gemini, and Google AI Mode are available as add-ons. Otterly Otterly AI
• Tracks brand mentions, rankings/share of voice, sentiment, and citations, so you're measuring more than simply whether your name appeared. Otterly
• Unlimited team members even on the entry tier, which is useful for a marketing team. Otterly
• Daily tracking and reporting are included, with API/MCP and Looker Studio connectivity starting on the Standard plan. Otterly Otterly

How I'd choose

Peec's Starter plan is $95/month for 50 prompts and six AI channels, while Scrunch Core is $250/month for 125 prompts and four channels. Peec AI Scrunch

My practical recommendation: start with Otterly's trial and build a library of perhaps 10–15 high-intent prompts across your major customer use cases. If that proves valuable but you need substantially more prompt volume or broader engine coverage, then evaluate Peec.

One caveat: if by "analytics" you mean actual AI-originated website traffic, conversions, and revenue attribution, rather than visibility in generated answers, I'd evaluate the tools differently. Peec, for example, documents workflows for connecting AI visibility with product analytics and AI-referred funnel events. Peec AI

Yes — the category you’re looking for is usually called AI visibility tracking, AI citation monitoring, or GEO/AEO monitoring.

If your goal is specifically “alert me when different AI assistants start citing our website/content”, these are worth looking at:

• genmention.com — specifically tracks whether ChatGPT, Gemini, and Perplexity cite your domain, with daily scans and email reporting. It also tracks the exact citation URL. GenMention
• mentionscout.com — broader coverage: ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity, Grok, Google AI Overviews, and AI Mode. It identifies the sources cited by each engine and can track competitors. MentionScout
• citations.io — tracks ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, and Claude, including the exact pages/domains cited. It also provides ongoing monitoring and alerts around changes. Citations.io
• ahrefs.com — useful if you're already using Ahrefs. It tracks mentions and citations across ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Copilot, Google AI Overviews and AI Mode, with historical monitoring in Brand Radar. Ahrefs
• getveritas.io — monitors citations and brand mentions across ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini and Google AI Overviews, including which of your pages are being cited. Veritas

The distinction I'd pay attention to

There are actually two different things you might want to monitor:

1. “Did the AI mention our brand?”

Example: ChatGPT says “Company X is a good option…”

2. “Did the AI cite one of our URLs?”

Example: ChatGPT answers a question and includes yourcompany.com/research/report as a source.

If your objective is content distribution / earned citations, #2 is the more useful metric.

For example, you could monitor 100 questions such as:

“What are the best approaches to X?”
“How does X work?”
“What are the latest statistics on X?”

Then have a system check ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Claude, etc. every day and alert you when:

New citation → URL → AI engine → prompt → date

Of the tools above, GenMention and Citations.io are particularly close to that specific workflow, while MentionScout has broader engine coverage. GenMention MentionScout Citations.io

If you tell me how many URLs/content pieces you want to monitor and which AI assistants matter (e.g. ChatGPT + Perplexity + Gemini + Claude), I can narrow this down to the most appropriate tool and pricing.

The category you’re looking for is usually called AI visibility monitoring, AI citation tracking, Answer Engine Optimization (AEO), or Generative Engine Optimization (GEO) tools. They monitor whether AI assistants cite your pages, mention your brand, or use your content as a source in answers. TechnologyAdvice The Rank Masters

Some tools to evaluate:

For a content team, the important capabilities to look for are:

• URL-level citation tracking — “Which of our articles did ChatGPT/Perplexity cite?”
• Prompt monitoring — “When someone asks ‘best tools for X,’ does our content appear?”
• Engine coverage — ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity, Copilot, Google AI Overviews/AI Mode
• Citation source reports — which pages, competitors, forums, or publications AI engines rely on
• Alerts or scheduled checks — Slack/email notifications when visibility changes
• Competitor tracking — whether another company’s content is replacing yours in answers

One caveat: no tool can see private user conversations with AI assistants. They generally work by running tracked prompts against AI systems on a schedule and analyzing the returned answers and citations. citeprism.com

If your goal is specifically “alert me whenever an AI assistant cites one of our URLs” rather than “track our brand visibility,” the shortlist changes slightly—I’d prioritize tools with URL-level citation logs and API/webhook support.

Yes. This category is usually called AI visibility tracking, AI search monitoring, or GEO tracking.

For a freelancer, I’d look at:

• OtterlyAI — tracks mentions and specific URLs cited across ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews, Gemini, Claude, Copilot, etc. Otterly Otterly
• Ahrefs Brand Radar — broader, more SEO-oriented; tracks mentions and citations across six AI surfaces and can show which pages are cited. Ahrefs
• Semrush AI Visibility — tracks mentions/citations and individual cited pages, with prompt monitoring. Semrush Semrush
• Rank.ai — particularly focused on repeated daily prompt checks and citation frequency. Rank.ai

For a solo freelancer, OtterlyAI is probably the closest match if your question is specifically “How often are my pages being surfaced/cited across multiple AI answer engines?”

If you tell me roughly how many websites/clients and pages you need to track, I can narrow this down to the most practical/cheapest option.

Yes. What you’re looking for is generally called an AI visibility tracker, AI search visibility platform, or GEO/AEO tracker.

These tools repeatedly run a set of relevant customer queries through multiple AI answer engines and record whether your site is mentioned, recommended, or cited—and often which exact page was cited.

A few options worth looking at:

• ahrefs.com — tracks mentions and citations across ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Copilot, and Google AI Overviews. Ahrefs specifically distinguishes a mention from a citation. Ahrefs
• citations.io — tracks ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, and Claude, including the exact domains/pages cited and how often you're cited. It starts at $39/month. Citations
• ai-visibility.io — explicitly has a plan aimed at agencies and freelancers, with 100 prompts/site, ChatGPT/Gemini/Perplexity tracking, competitors, historical trends, CSV export, and white-label capabilities. AI Visibility
• deepsmith.ai — tracks mention rate, citation rate, and share of voice across ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Claude, and Google AI Mode, with the underlying answers available for inspection. DeepSmith
• koalr.ai — focuses on whether you're mentioned, cited, or recommended, with coverage across multiple AI answer engines. Koalr

For a freelancer, I'd look for these specific capabilities

The important distinction is that you probably don't just want "does AI mention my business?" You want something closer to:

"Of the 200 questions potential clients ask AI about my service, how many times did AI surface my website, and exactly which pages did it use?"

So I'd prioritize:

1. Prompt tracking — you define questions such as “best freelance UX designer for SaaS startups.”
2. Multiple engines — ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Claude, Google AI Overviews/AI Mode, etc.
3. Citation-level tracking — tells you which URL on your site was surfaced.
4. Historical tracking — e.g. citation rate went from 8% → 17% over three months.
5. Competitor tracking — see which other freelancers/agencies are being surfaced instead.
6. Export/reporting — particularly useful if you're reporting results to freelance clients.
7. Geographic/prompt segmentation — useful if your target market is, say, “freelance web designer in California” rather than generic web design.

One particularly relevant option for a freelancer is AI Visibility, because its current offering explicitly includes an agency/freelancer plan and white-label reporting. AI Visibility

If by “our pages” you mean individual URLs on a freelancer's own website, rather than simply tracking whether the business/brand is mentioned, I can also narrow this down to platforms that specifically measure page-level AI citations and compare their pricing.

For a local business, the type of software you’re looking for is usually called AI visibility tracking, AEO (Answer Engine Optimisation) tracking, or GEO (Generative Engine Optimisation) monitoring. These tools run customer-style prompts across AI assistants and show whether your business appears, whether it is cited, which sources were used, and which competitors appear instead. Citations Local Glyph

Some options:

For a single local business (plumber, dentist, restaurant, salon, trades, etc.), I’d usually look for these features:

• Track the exact customer questions you care about:

• “best plumber near me”
• “emergency plumber in [town]”
• “top-rated [service] in [area]”
• Run them across:

• ChatGPT
• Gemini
• Perplexity
• Google AI search experiences (where available)
• Show:

• Was my business mentioned?
• Was my website cited?
• Which competitor was chosen?
• Which websites/reviews/directories influenced the answer?
• Did the AI give incorrect business details?

A simpler alternative is a spreadsheet-based approach: manually run a fixed set of prompts weekly in each assistant and record mentions, citations, and competitors. Some industry guidance recommends this approach for smaller businesses before paying for software. Pleiades Consultancy

If you tell me the type of local business, country, and whether you need it for one location or multiple locations, I can narrow this to the most suitable tools.

If by “answer positions” you mean where your brand/content appears in AI-generated answers—e.g. #1, #2, #5, or not mentioned—and you want historical trends across multiple assistants, there are several platforms worth evaluating.

Strong fits

• Centium — Particularly relevant if position is the core KPI. It tracks the ordered position of brands inside answers across ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity, Grok, and Google AI Mode, and shows position-frequency distributions and movement over time. Centium
• Writesonic AI Visibility Tracker — More of a broader content-marketing/AEO platform. It tracks ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Google AI and others, with daily visibility, citations, competitors, trends, intent, and content-oriented analysis. Writesonic
• DeepSmith — Tracks mention rate, citation rate, share of voice, actual answers, competitors, and 7/30/90-day trends across ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Claude and Google AI Mode. DeepSmith
• Indexly — Useful if you want detailed historical prompt-level data: daily snapshots, position/rank, mentions, sentiment, citations, and diffs across days/weeks/months. Indexly
• Menra — Broader assistant coverage, including ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini, Copilot, Grok, Google AI Overview, DeepSeek and Meta AI, with per-prompt visibility and rolling 8-week trends. Menra

What I'd evaluate for a content marketing team

I'd prioritize these capabilities rather than just an aggregate “AI visibility score”:

1. Exact prompt tracking — You want to know which buyer questions are being monitored.
2. Position + mention rate separately — A brand appearing in 90% of answers but usually at #8 is different from appearing in 30% but usually #1.
3. Historical answer snapshots — The ability to inspect the actual answer from three months ago versus today.
4. Citation/URL tracking — Which of your articles are actually being used as sources.
5. Competitor movement — Who replaced you and which content sources the assistant cited instead.
6. Assistant-level trends — ChatGPT vs. Gemini vs. Claude vs. Perplexity rather than one blended score.
7. Content attribution — Connecting changes in visibility to articles, updates, PR, or other content your team shipped.

For your specific wording—“track multi-assistant answer positions + historic trends”—I'd put Centium, Indexly, and Writesonic at the top of the initial evaluation, because they explicitly expose position/history rather than only measuring whether your brand was mentioned. Centium Indexly Writesonic

If you tell me your team size, approximate number of prompts, and whether you care more about SEO/content planning or executive reporting, I can narrow this to 2–3 platforms and compare their current pricing/features.

If by “answer positions” you mean where your brand/content appears inside AI-generated answers—e.g. #1, #3, #7 in ChatGPT/Gemini/Perplexity responses—and you want historical trends, there are several purpose-built platforms.

Centium is the closest match to your wording. Its distinctive feature is Position Frequency: rather than reducing performance to a single visibility score, it records how frequently your brand lands in each position across AI answers. It also tracks the movement of those positions over time. Centium

For a content marketing team, I'd structure the evaluation around these capabilities:

• Prompt-level history: Can you see exactly which questions caused a position change?
• Competitor positions: Can you see who replaced you and where?
• Citation tracking: Which articles/sites are the assistants using to construct the answer?
• Engine-level trends: ChatGPT vs. Gemini vs. Perplexity rather than one blended score.
• Content attribution: Can the team connect a published/update piece of content with subsequent AI visibility changes?
• Exports/API: Important if you're feeding this into Looker, Tableau, HubSpot, or internal reporting.

If you already have an Ahrefs-heavy content operation, I'd also look seriously at Ahrefs Brand Radar because it combines AI visibility with an established SEO/content research stack; its current offering includes historical trends and custom prompts alongside a large prompt dataset. Ahrefs

If your primary KPI is literally “Are we moving from position 6 → 4 → 2 in AI answers?”, I'd shortlist Centium, Ometrix, and AirPulse first. Centium ometrix.ai airpulse.ai

If you tell me your team size, approximate monthly budget, and whether you need ChatGPT/Claude/Gemini/Perplexity, I can narrow this to 2–3 platforms and compare their pricing, prompt limits, historical depth, and reporting capabilities.

Yes. There’s now a fairly established AI search / AI visibility / GEO (Generative Engine Optimization) software category that does roughly this.

The important distinction for an online publisher is whether you want to know:

1. Which queries cause AI assistants to cite your articles?
2. Which queries cause them to mention your publication?
3. Which URLs/articles they cite for each query?
4. Which competitors are cited instead?
5. How this changes across ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Claude, Google AI Overviews/AI Mode, Copilot, etc.
6. Ideally, which of those AI queries ultimately generate referral traffic to your site.

Tools worth looking at

• otterly.ai — tracks a defined set of prompts across ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews/AI Mode, Gemini, Copilot and Claude, including the URLs cited in answers. It also has prompt research intended to uncover the questions/topics driving visibility. Otterly Otterly
• ahrefs.com — particularly interesting if you're already using Ahrefs. Its Brand Radar tracks mentions and citations across several AI surfaces and separates mentions from actual website citations. Ahrefs
• pagelens.ai — explicitly lets you see the prompts being run in your category, which brands get named, and the sources behind individual answers. PageLens
• rank.ai — tracks defined queries daily across multiple assistants and reports whether your site/brand is mentioned or cited. Rank.ai
• scalepost.ai — this is somewhat different and especially relevant to publishers. Rather than asking AI systems synthetic test questions, it monitors your first-party CDN logs to see which AI agents actually fetch your URLs. That can give you evidence of real AI-agent activity rather than sampled prompt tests. ScalePost

The publisher-specific problem

There is still an important gap in the market.

Most AI-visibility products work by taking a library of queries such as:

"What are the best sources for X?"
"How does X work?"
"What happened with X?"
"Best X publications?"

They repeatedly send those queries to AI systems and record the resulting citations.

That tells you "this query produces visibility for us." It doesn't necessarily tell you "these are the actual queries real users are asking that generated this citation."

For a publisher, I'd therefore distinguish between:

Query-level AI visibility
→ "When we test 10,000 relevant questions, which ones cite us?"

and

Observed AI demand / attribution
→ "Which questions did actual users ask, and which of those resulted in our article being retrieved/cited/visited?"

The first is available today from several vendors. The second is considerably harder because ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, etc. generally don't expose the user's actual query/referral information to publishers in the same way Google Search Console exposes Google search queries.

That's why ScalePost's first-party CDN approach is interesting: it can tell a publisher which AI agents actually fetched which URLs, although it doesn't magically reveal the user's underlying conversational query. ScalePost

If you're evaluating this for a publisher

I'd look for a platform that can produce a dataset like:

That combination—query × assistant × cited URL × competitor × actual referral—is probably the most valuable dataset for an online publisher.

If you tell me roughly what kind of publisher you are (news, financial information, sports, B2B, consumer, academic, etc.) and whether you're interested in SEO/GEO optimization or measuring actual traffic, I can identify the 3–5 products that are closest to that specific use case and explain what each can and cannot measure.

Yes. There’s now a fairly mature category for this, usually called AI visibility tracking, AEO (Answer Engine Optimization), or GEO (Generative Engine Optimization).

For an online publisher, though, I’d distinguish between two slightly different jobs:

1. “Which queries cause my publication to appear/cited?”
2. “Which queries are actually being asked by users, and therefore drive AI-referred traffic?”

Most products are much better at #1 than #2.

Tools worth looking at

• ahrefs.com — tracks how a brand appears across ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Copilot and Google AI Overviews. Their broader Brand Radar product is particularly relevant if you already use Ahrefs. Ahrefs
• hubspot.com — tracks individual prompts, visibility, competitors, and, importantly for a publisher, which pages/domains are being cited. HubSpot
• wellows.com — particularly focused on query-level tracking: prompt → AI answer → mention → citation, with filters for intent, platform, competitor, etc. Wellows
• genwolf.ai — monitors prompts across ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews and AI Mode, including the sources cited for each answer. Genwolf
• rankscale.ai — broader multi-engine coverage, claiming 17+ AI engines and intent-based prompt research. Rankscale.ai
• airpulse.ai — tracks individual prompts and shows mentions, rank within answers, citations and changes over time. AirPulse

The important publisher-specific distinction

If you're a publisher like a news site, magazine, reviews site, recipe site, sports site, etc., I'd want a system that can produce something like:

The first five columns are what today's AI visibility platforms are increasingly good at. The last column—actual traffic attributable to the underlying AI query—is considerably harder.

That's because assistants generally don't give publishers a clean equivalent of Google Search Console's query → impression → click dataset. Consequently, many platforms infer the important prompts, monitor a representative prompt set, and separately measure AI-referred visits in analytics.

If you're evaluating this for a publisher

I'd specifically ask vendors whether they can:

• Discover queries relevant to your content, rather than requiring you to manually supply every prompt.
• Track individual URLs/articles, not merely your brand.
• Show which passages/pages are cited.
• Track citations across ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Claude, Google AI Overviews/AI Mode, and Copilot.
• Identify queries where a competitor gets cited but you don't.
• Separate informational, navigational, commercial and news/trending queries.
• Connect AI visibility to GA4/referral traffic.
• Export the underlying prompt/answer/citation data, rather than giving you only a proprietary “visibility score.”
• Track changes over time, since AI answers are much less stable than conventional rankings.

If what you're really asking is “Is there a product that can tell an online publisher which specific AI queries are generating visibility and traffic to its articles, across ChatGPT/Perplexity/Gemini/etc.?” — that's a narrower problem, and I can map out the current vendors specifically against that requirement.

That's because assistants generally don't give publishers a clean equivalent of Google Search Console's query → impression → click dataset. Consequently, many platforms infer the important prompts, monitor a representative prompt set, and separately measure AI-referred visits in analytics.

If you're evaluating this for a publisher

I'd specifically ask vendors whether they can:

• Discover queries relevant to your content, rather than requiring you to manually supply every prompt.
• Track individual URLs/articles, not merely your brand.
• Show which passages/pages are cited.
• Track citations across ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Claude, Google AI Overviews/AI Mode, and Copilot.
• Identify queries where a competitor gets cited but you don't.
• Separate informational, navigational, commercial and news/trending queries.
• Connect AI visibility to GA4/referral traffic.
• Export the underlying prompt/answer/citation data, rather than giving you only a proprietary “visibility score.”
• Track changes over time, since AI answers are much less stable than conventional rankings.

If what you're really asking is “Is there a product that can tell an online publisher which specific AI queries are generating visibility and traffic to its articles, across ChatGPT/Perplexity/Gemini/etc.?” — that's a narrower problem, and I can map out the current vendors specifically against that requirement.

If your goal is client-facing reporting of AI citations + answer placement across multiple assistants, I’d shortlist these:

The category has matured quite a bit in 2026. Current platforms commonly monitor ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Claude, Google AI Overviews/AI Mode and sometimes Copilot/Grok, rather than treating "AI visibility" as one generic metric. Promptwatch Airefs

What I'd prioritize for your use case

If you're an agency producing recurring client dashboards, don't optimize primarily for a single "AI visibility score." I'd want the platform to expose the underlying evidence:

• Prompt → exact AI answer
• Whether the client was mentioned
• Whether the client's URL/domain was cited
• Citation position/order
• Which competitor was cited instead
• Share of voice against competitors
• Results broken down by AI platform
• Historical changes
• Exact cited URLs/pages
• Export/API capability
• White-label or client portal/reporting
• Ability to maintain a fixed prompt set, so month-over-month numbers are meaningful

That distinction matters because a brand can be mentioned frequently but still have weak citation presence or consistently appear below competitors. Some newer dashboards explicitly separate mention rate, citation rate, citation share and average position. SynectGEO DeepSmith

My practical shortlist

For an agency: I'd investigate Goodie + Profound + Promptwatch first.

For a serious enterprise GEO program: Profound / AthenaHQ / Promptwatch.

For a leaner operation: Otterly.AI / Peec AI.

One particularly important capability is real-answer capture rather than relying solely on API-generated responses. Promptwatch, for example, says it captures the actual interfaces and citation ordering, while other platforms similarly emphasize storing the underlying answer behind each metric. Promptwatch DeepSmith

If you tell me how many clients you manage (e.g. 10, 50, 200+) and whether you need white-label dashboards, I can narrow this to the best 2–3 options and compare pricing, platforms, API/export, client reporting, and citation-position tracking.

If your goal is client-facing reporting of AI assistant visibility—especially citations, answer placement, competitors, and trends across multiple platforms—I’d shortlist these:

• tryprofound.com — strongest fit for enterprise-grade citation/answer intelligence. It’s designed around deep source-level citation tracking, prompt monitoring, competitive visibility, and reporting. Current comparisons consistently put it toward the enterprise end of the market. Bloomiro UX Continuum
• peec.ai — particularly attractive for agencies/mid-market teams managing multiple brands. It focuses on prompt-level AI visibility, competitors, and multi-language tracking without the enterprise-heavy positioning of Profound. Bloomiro Toolsolved
• otterly.ai — good if you mainly need recurring visibility reporting at lower cost. Its API/reporting depth is more limited, but it's comparatively accessible for agency workflows. UX Continuum Toolsolved
• promptwatch.com — worth a close look if actual prompt/answer/citation data needs to feed your own client dashboard. Its reported API exposes prompt-level performance and page-level citation data, which is useful if you're building a reporting layer rather than just consuming a SaaS dashboard. Toolsolved
• scrunch.com — interesting if you want visibility monitoring plus an "agent experience" layer, including AI crawler activity, rather than just answer monitoring. Baarely

For your specific use case

I'd evaluate them in this order by capability rather than an overall "best" ranking:

The important distinction: don't buy a tool merely because it gives you an "AI visibility score." For client reporting, I'd want the underlying record to look roughly like:

client → prompt → AI platform/model → answer → brand mention → position → cited URL → competitor mentions → timestamp

That lets you produce much more defensible reports such as "Brand was mentioned in 43% of tracked answers, appeared in position 2.1 on average, and was cited from 17 distinct URLs" rather than a proprietary visibility score.

If you're building this into a SaaS/client dashboard yourself, I'd lean toward an API-first platform such as Promptwatch or Profound, rather than a tool whose primary value is its own dashboard. Current comparisons specifically identify API depth and page-level citation data as major differentiators. Toolsolved

If you tell me how many clients, approximate prompts/client, and which assistants you need (ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity, Copilot, Google AI Overviews/Mode, etc.), I can narrow this to a practical stack and estimate the likely monthly cost.

Yes. What you’re describing is generally called AI search visibility / Answer Engine Optimization (AEO) monitoring: track the same buyer prompts across AI assistants, see where your brand/product appears, and—crucially—identify which URLs those assistants cite.

A few tools currently fit that use case particularly well:

• OtterlyAI — probably the closest match. It tracks prompts across ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews/AI Mode, Gemini, Copilot and Claude, and its citation tracking shows which specific URLs from your site are being cited. otterly.ai
• Profound — geared more toward enterprise AI-search intelligence, with prompt/ranking monitoring, source citations and agent analytics. otterly.aitechnologyadvice.com
• Rankscale — tracks 17+ AI engines and combines mentions, rankings and citations with page-level audits. rankscale.ai
• Scrunch — particularly interesting if you want to understand both AI citations and AI crawler/agent activity. otterly.aitechnologyadvice.com

For your specific requirement

I'd structure the measurement around a matrix like:

That cited-URL → product/page mapping is the part I'd pay particular attention to. OtterlyAI explicitly supports this: it can show which pages AI engines actually link to and how frequently each URL is cited. otterly.ai

If you're managing a large product catalog, I'd also look for an API/export so you can build your own mapping of:

AI prompt → assistant → answer → citation URL → product/SKU → competitor → visibility over time.

That becomes much more useful than a single "AI visibility score," because you can answer which product pages are actually influencing AI-generated recommendations.

You’re looking for an AEO/GEO (answer-engine optimization) visibility platform.

• Profound — enterprise-focused; tracks AI visibility, citations, prompts, competitors, and AI crawler activity. xSeek Lectern
• Peec AI — useful for prompt-level monitoring, citations, competitors, and benchmarking across AI engines. Conbersa
• Otterly.AI — simpler monitoring of prompts, mentions, and citations; useful for mapping which pages get surfaced. Otterly

For your specific requirement—“which of our product URLs are being cited by which AI assistants for which queries?”—I'd evaluate Profound and Peec first, making sure the demo shows page-level citation/source data, not merely a brand visibility score. austinheaton.com

Yes. The category is usually called AI visibility tracking, LLM visibility monitoring, Answer Engine Optimization (AEO), or Generative Engine Optimization (GEO). These platforms monitor how brands/products appear in answers from multiple AI assistants (for example ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity), often tracking mentions, recommendation position, citations, competitors, and historical changes. Meltwater Developer Portal SE Ranking

Some platforms that provide dashboards and/or API access:

For an engineering team, I would look for these API capabilities specifically:

• Prompt management API — create and update the questions you want monitored.
• Model coverage — per-engine results (ChatGPT vs Claude vs Gemini, etc.).
• Raw answer capture — store the full assistant response, not only a score.
• Placement extraction — where your company/product appears in the answer (for example, list position).
• Citation/source extraction — which URLs or sources influenced the answer.
• Historical snapshots — detect movement over time.
• Webhooks or scheduled jobs — push changes into your own dashboards.
• Export formats — JSON is preferable for internal pipelines.

A typical engineering architecture would look like:

AI visibility platform API
          |
          v
 ingestion service
          |
          +--> warehouse (BigQuery/Snowflake/Postgres)
          |
          +--> dashboards (Looker/Tableau/custom UI)
          |
          +--> alerts (Slack/email/Jira)

If you are building this into an internal product rather than buying a dashboard, prioritize vendors with a documented REST API, bulk scan support, and permissioned workspaces. Trackee Trackee

If you share your use case (SEO team monitoring, SaaS product analytics, agency reporting, or building a customer-facing SaaS), I can narrow the options.

Yes. What you’re describing is generally called AI visibility / answer-engine visibility tracking (also GEO/AEO tracking): you define a set of prompts, run them across multiple assistants, and track whether/how your brand or product appears, its position, competitors, and cited sources.

A few platforms currently offer API access, which is particularly relevant if your engineering team wants to ingest the data into your own warehouse, dashboard, alerts, or product:

• Cituna — REST API covering ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Claude, Grok, Google AI Overviews, and AI Mode. It exposes prompt-level visibility, positions, raw answers, and citation sources. Cituna
• Sellm — REST API across ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity, Gemini, and Grok; positioned specifically for pulling AI-search visibility into internal dashboards and reporting pipelines. Sellm
• Honeyb — API-oriented product with task submission, individual answer records, engine/prompt/position data, competitors, sentiment, and citations. It covers eight engines, including DeepSeek and Google's AI surfaces. Honeyb
• Rank Prompt — REST API plus webhooks and MCP, covering ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews, and Grok. Rank Prompt
• SearchFIT — REST API for AI visibility/share-of-voice, reports, and prompt-level rankings, currently covering ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, and Google AI Overviews. SearchFIT
• SE Ranking — AI Visibility API with structured data across ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, AI Overviews, and AI Mode, with API access integrated into its plans. SE Ranking

What I'd look for technically

If this is for an engineering integration, I wouldn't choose based solely on the dashboard. The important question is whether they give you the raw observation layer, something roughly like:

{
  "prompt": "best CRM for a 50-person SaaS company",
  "engine": "chatgpt",
  "timestamp": "2026-09-17T00:00:00Z",
  "answer": "...",
  "brand_mentioned": true,
  "brand_position": 2,
  "competitors": ["HubSpot", "Salesforce"],
  "citations": [
    {"url": "...", "domain": "..."}
  ]
}

That lets your team independently calculate share of answer, mention rate, first-position rate, citation rate, competitor displacement, and trends, rather than becoming dependent on the vendor's proprietary "visibility score."

One important distinction: tracking an assistant's answer is different from querying the underlying LLM API. Some vendors collect answers from the actual consumer-facing interfaces, while others generate answers through model APIs/search APIs. That can produce materially different results, so I'd specifically ask each vendor how each engine is sampled. CitePrism, for example, explicitly distinguishes between app-level observation and API-based collection. CitePrism

If you tell me which assistants you need (e.g. ChatGPT + Gemini + Claude + Perplexity), approximate number of prompts, and whether you want raw answers or just metrics, I can narrow these down to the APIs that fit your engineering architecture.