Best AI Search Visibility Tools in 2026
Generative engine optimisation tools track whether AI assistants mention your brand when answering relevant questions. Pricing in this category is unstable and widely misreported. Read from vendor pages on 6 September 2026: Profound starts at $99 per month billed yearly for 50 prompts and ChatGPT only, rising to $399 for 100 prompts across three answer engines. Otterly is the cheapest genuine entry point at $29 per month, or $25 billed annually, for 15 prompts across four engines. Scrunch starts at $250 per month billed annually, or $300 month to month, for 350 custom prompts and six platforms. We could not verify Peec AI's pricing from its own page, and third-party sources disagree with each other, so we have not published a figure for it. The widely repeated Profound figures of $82.50 and $332.50 do not match its current page, and the equally common description of Scrunch as $250 for 125 prompts across four engines understates its current plan on all three counts. Check engine coverage before price: the cheapest plan here tracks four engines and one of the most expensive entry tiers tracks one.
What these tools do, and what they do not
Generative engine optimisation, usually shortened to GEO, is the practice of trying to influence whether AI assistants mention your brand when someone asks a question in your category. The tools in this article do not do that. They measure it.
The mechanism is consistent across all of them. You supply a set of prompts — the questions a buyer in your market would actually type. The tool runs those prompts against a set of answer engines on a schedule, records whether your brand appears, in what position, alongside which competitors, and which sources the engine cited. Over weeks, that produces a trend line.
That distinction between measuring and improving is worth holding onto while you read pricing pages, because the marketing in this category blurs it consistently. A subscription tells you that Perplexity recommends three competitors and not you. Changing that requires earning citations on the sources Perplexity already trusts, which is editorial and PR work that no dashboard performs.
How we compared, and why it took so long
We read pricing from each vendor's own page on 6 September 2026. That sounds unremarkable. It turned out to be the entire story.
Four of the five tools we set out to cover are priced differently on their own sites than in the comparison articles currently ranking for this topic. One of them we could not price at all. We have flagged every discrepancy rather than quietly publishing the number we found, because the pattern itself is the most useful finding for anyone evaluating this category: assume any GEO pricing you read elsewhere, including a figure from three months ago, is stale.
We have not run trials of these products or compared the accuracy of their tracking. This is a pricing, coverage and positioning comparison built from published sources.
The verified pricing table
| Tool | Entry price | Prompts at entry | Engines at entry | Next tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Otterly | $29/mo ($25 annual) | 15 | 4 | $189/mo ($160 annual), 100 prompts |
| Profound | $99/mo billed yearly | 50 | 1 (ChatGPT) | $399/mo, 100 prompts, 3 engines |
| Scrunch | $250/mo annual ($300 monthly) | 350 custom + 1,000 industry | 6 | $417/mo annual ($500 monthly), 700 custom |
| Peec AI | Not verifiable | — | 3 self-serve (reported) | — |
Sources: Otterly pricing, Profound pricing, Scrunch pricing. All read 6 September 2026.
1. Otterly — Best for a first baseline
Best for: finding out whether you appear in AI answers at all, without a procurement conversation.
Otterly is the only tool here priced like a normal SaaS product rather than an enterprise commitment. Its Lite plan is $29 per month, or $25 billed annually, and tracks 15 prompts daily across four engines: ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, Perplexity and Microsoft Copilot.
- Standard: $189/month, or $160 billed annually, for 100 prompts, adding API and MCP access.
- Premium: $489/month, or $422 billed annually, for 400 prompts.
- Enterprise: custom, starting above $1,000/month.
- Add-ons: Claude, Google AI Mode and Gemini are paid additions rather than included at any self-serve tier.
Limitations: 15 prompts is genuinely small, and the jump from Lite to Standard is a 6.5x price increase for 6.7x the prompts, so there is no volume discount in the middle of the range. The four included engines are the four you would guess; the ones increasingly worth tracking, Claude and Google AI Mode, cost extra. Most published comparisons quote only Otterly's annual prices without labelling them as annual, which makes it look cheaper than the month-to-month reality.
2. Profound — Best for enterprise reporting, at a price
Best for: organisations that need answer-engine visibility in a format a marketing executive will read.
Profound is positioned as the enterprise option in this category and prices accordingly. Its Starter plan is $99 per month billed yearly for 50 tracked prompts — and monitors ChatGPT only. Growth is $399 per month billed yearly for 100 prompts across three answer engines. Enterprise is custom.
- Starter: $99/month billed yearly, 50 prompts, ChatGPT only.
- Growth: $399/month billed yearly, 100 prompts, three answer engines. Marked as the popular tier.
- Enterprise: custom pricing and prompt limits.
- Trials: Profound offers demos rather than a free trial, so evaluation requires a sales conversation.
Limitations: the single-engine Starter tier is the thing to notice. At $99 a month you are tracking one assistant, while Otterly tracks four for $29. Unless ChatGPT is genuinely the only engine that matters to your business, Starter is poor value and the real entry point is Growth at $399. The absence of a self-serve trial also means you cannot evaluate the product without committing to a plan or a sales process.
A correction worth stating plainly: Profound is very widely reported at $82.50 for Starter and $332.50 for Growth. Those figures appear across multiple comparison articles and do not match Profound's current pricing page, which shows $99 and $399. If you have a budget built on the older numbers, it is roughly 20% short.
3. Scrunch — Best for breadth of engine coverage
Best for: teams that need Claude and Meta tracked alongside the obvious four, and have the budget for it.
Scrunch starts higher than the others and delivers materially more at that tier. Starter is $250 per month billed annually, or $300 month to month, and includes 350 custom prompts plus 1,000 industry prompts. Growth is $417 per month billed annually, or $500 month to month, with 700 custom prompts and 2,500 industry prompts.
- Platform coverage: six platforms — ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity, Google AI Mode and AI Overviews, and Meta.
- Starter: $250/month annual, 350 custom + 1,000 industry prompts.
- Growth: $417/month annual, 700 custom + 2,500 industry prompts.
- Enterprise: custom limits.
The industry-prompt library is a genuine structural difference rather than a marketing distinction. Custom prompts are the questions you write; industry prompts are a prebuilt set for your category. Whether the second kind is useful depends entirely on how well the library matches your niche, which you should check in a demo rather than assume.
Limitations: $250 a month is a real commitment for a category this young, and there is no cheap tier to test with. The prompt counts also cannot be compared directly against Otterly's or Profound's single numbers, since the split between custom and industry prompts is unique to Scrunch.
Another widely repeated error: Scrunch is commonly described as $250 per month for 125 prompts across four engines. Its own pricing page shows 350 custom prompts, 1,000 industry prompts, and six platforms at that price. Every element of the repeated description understates the current plan.
4. Peec AI — Listed without a price, deliberately
Best for: we cannot responsibly say, because we could not verify what it costs.
Peec AI appears in essentially every comparison of this category, usually positioned as the mid-market analytics option with the best depth-to-price ratio. We attempted to verify that and could not.
Peec's pricing page lists four tiers — Starter, Pro, Advanced and Enterprise — but the prices are not rendered in the page content we could retrieve. Third-party sources give at least three conflicting figures: €89 and €199 for Starter and Pro in one widely cited comparison; €85, €205 and €425 in another set of sources; and €89, €205 and €425 in a third. Prompt allowances attributed to the Starter tier vary between 25 and 50 depending on which article you read.
Multiple secondary sources also state that self-serve plans track only three models chosen from a larger list, with additional engines as paid add-ons priced per tier. If accurate, that is a significant structural limitation and it is not reflected in most comparison tables.
What we are saying: we do not know what Peec costs, and neither does any article that has copied a figure without checking it. The product may be excellent and the pricing may be competitive. Get the number from Peec directly before you compare it to anything here.
Which should you choose?
If you have never measured this before: Otterly at $29. Fifteen prompts across four engines is enough to answer the only question that matters at the start — do we appear at all — and the cost of finding out is less than a team lunch. Expand later once you know whether there is a problem.
If ChatGPT is genuinely your only relevant engine: Profound Starter, though check that assumption first. For most B2B categories Perplexity and Google AI Overviews carry meaningful volume, and single-engine tracking will hide movement in both.
If you need Claude or Meta coverage: Scrunch, which is the only tool here that includes six platforms at its entry tier. That breadth is the reason for the price gap, and it is a defensible reason.
If you are an agency managing several brands: Scrunch's tiers are structured around brand workspaces and seats in a way the others are not, which is worth a demo.
If you are choosing on price alone: re-read the engine coverage column first. The cheapest tool in this comparison covers four engines and the second-most-expensive entry tier covers one. Price and coverage are close to uncorrelated at the bottom of this market.
Is this category worth paying for yet?
A fair question, and the honest answer is that it depends on how much of your pipeline starts with a question typed into an assistant rather than a search box.
If the answer is "we genuinely do not know," a $29 monthly subscription for three months is a cheap way to find out, and considerably cheaper than a GEO agency retainer bought on the same uncertainty. If the answer is "a lot," then the more expensive tools start justifying themselves on engine coverage rather than on features.
What none of these tools will do is fix the underlying problem. AI assistants cite sources they already trust, which means visibility in AI answers is downstream of the same editorial credibility that has always driven search. Our comparison of AI search engines covers how differently each engine sources its answers, which is worth understanding before you pay anyone to track them. If you are evaluating where to be listed in the first place, our guide to AI tool directories covers that adjacent question, including our own disclosure about operating in that space.
Conclusion
This is a young category with unstable pricing and a comparison ecosystem that has largely stopped checking its own numbers. Three of the four tools we could price are misreported in widely circulated articles, and the fourth cannot be priced from its own website at all.
On the figures we verified: Otterly is the accessible entry point at $29 a month for four engines, Scrunch is the coverage leader at $250 for six, and Profound's $99 tier is the weakest value in the set because it tracks a single assistant. Peec may belong in this conversation but nobody publishing about it appears to know what it charges.
Buy on engine coverage rather than headline price, start smaller than the vendors suggest, and re-read the pricing page on the day you sign.
This comparison is an editorial synthesis of vendor pricing pages read on 6 September 2026 and linked inline. We did not trial these products, compare tracking accuracy, or receive briefings from these teams. Where we could not verify a price from the vendor's own site we have said so and published no figure rather than repeat an unverified one. Web3AIBlog operates in the adjacent AI tool directory space; we have no commercial relationship with any tool listed here. Pricing in this category changes frequently; verify before purchasing.
Key Takeaways
- Profound's entry plan is $99 per month billed yearly for 50 tracked prompts, and it monitors ChatGPT only. The Growth plan at $399 covers 100 prompts across three answer engines.
- Otterly is the cheapest real entry point: $29 per month, or $25 billed annually, for 15 prompts tracked across ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, Perplexity and Microsoft Copilot. Claude, Google AI Mode and Gemini are paid add-ons.
- Scrunch starts at $250 per month billed annually ($300 month to month) for 350 custom prompts plus 1,000 industry prompts, and tracks six platforms including Claude and Meta.
- Engine coverage does not scale with price at the entry tier. Otterly at $29 covers four engines; Profound at $99 covers one. Buying on headline price alone gets this backwards.
- Peec AI's pricing could not be verified from its own site, and third-party sources give at least three conflicting figures. We have listed it without a price rather than repeat an unverified number.
- Prompt counts are not comparable across vendors either. Scrunch separates custom prompts from a much larger industry prompt library; others quote a single number. Compare what each prompt actually buys.
- Almost every published comparison of this category contains stale pricing. If a figure matters to your budget, read it from the vendor's page on the day you decide.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a GEO or AI search visibility tool?
It monitors whether AI assistants mention or cite your brand when they answer questions in your category. You supply a set of prompts, the tool runs them against engines like ChatGPT, Perplexity and Google AI Overviews on a schedule, and reports how often you appear, in what position, and which sources the engine cited.
Which AI visibility tool is cheapest?
Otterly, at $29 per month or $25 billed annually for 15 prompts. That is the lowest genuine entry point among the tools we could verify, and it tracks four engines at that tier. Profound's $99 plan is more than three times the price and monitors ChatGPT only.
Why do other articles quote different prices for these tools?
Because the category reprices frequently and most comparisons are not re-checked. The commonly repeated Profound figures of $82.50 and $332.50 do not match its current page, and Scrunch is widely described as $250 for 125 prompts across four engines when its own page shows 350 custom prompts and six platforms.
How many prompts do I actually need to track?
Fewer than vendors imply, at least initially. Fifteen to fifty well-chosen prompts covering your core category questions will tell you whether you appear at all, which is the finding that matters first. Expanding to hundreds is worth doing once you have established a baseline and need to segment by product or region.
Do these tools actually improve my AI visibility?
They measure it; they do not improve it. Every tool here is a monitoring product that reports where you stand and which sources engines cite in your category. Acting on that data, by earning citations on the sources the engines already trust, is separate work that the subscription does not do for you.
Is it worth paying for this instead of checking manually?
Manual checking works for a handful of prompts and breaks down quickly, because answers vary by session, region and model version, so a single check tells you little. The value of these tools is scheduled, repeated sampling that separates a real ranking change from ordinary variance. Below roughly ten prompts, doing it by hand is reasonable.
About the Author
Aisha Patel
AI Editorial Desk
AI Editorial Desk · Web3AIBlog
Aisha Patel is a pen name for our AI editorial desk. Posts under this byline are written and reviewed by our team of contributors with backgrounds in machine learning, large language models, AI infrastructure, and applied research. The desk covers frontier model releases, agent architectures, retrieval-augmented generation, on-device inference, and the engineering tradeoffs that matter when shipping AI in production. Every technical claim is verified against primary sources before publication.
