Key takeaways
- Searchable's $125/mo Pro plan caps out at 100 prompts and has no white-label reporting; you need the $400/mo Scale plan just to send clients a branded PDF.
- Agencies running 10+ clients should evaluate tools on per-client economics first, not feature lists. Per-brand enterprise pricing (Profound, AthenaHQ) collapses fast past a handful of accounts.
- Peec AI, Rank Prompt, and Promptwatch all built dedicated agency tiers with consolidated billing, white-label dashboards, and prospecting workflows baked in.
- Promptwatch is the only platform in this group that goes beyond tracking into execution: content gap analysis, automated article generation, and CMS publishing that agencies can bill as deliverables, not just a screenshot of a dashboard.
- Most agencies billing 5-50 clients land in the $200-$750/month range for the tool itself, with the reporting retainer added on top as a separate line item.
Why Searchable stops working once you have a client roster
Searchable is a decent single-brand AEO tool. It tracks ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, and Perplexity on the entry Pro plan, turns findings into an "Actions" task list, and does a reasonable job explaining why a brand is or isn't showing up in AI answers. For one site, $125 a month is fine.
The problem shows up the moment you try to run it across a client book. Pro caps you at 100 tracked prompts, which is thin if you're managing even three or four accounts with separate product lines or markets. White-label reporting, the thing agencies actually need to bill clients monthly, doesn't exist until you jump to the $400/mo Scale tier. And even then, Searchable has no execution layer. Its Actions feature is a prioritized to-do list you export to Linear; someone on your team still has to manually write the schema, fix the internal links, or publish the content. One Trustpilot reviewer put it bluntly: "The AI that runs through the entire thing acts as if it can't see the rest of the app."
For an agency selling a monthly AI visibility retainer, that's two separate cost problems: the tool itself, and the labor to act on what it finds. If your retainer margin depends on reporting being fast and the fixes being semi-automated, Searchable's structure works against you.
What actually matters when you're billing clients monthly
Before picking a replacement, it helps to separate what looks good in a sales demo from what survives a real client roster. Five things tend to decide whether a tool is sustainable for an agency:
- White-label reports that go out under your logo, not the vendor's
- Per-brand or credit-based pricing that doesn't punish you for adding client #11
- A prospecting mode, so you can pull a free visibility snapshot on a prospect before they sign
- Some kind of execution layer, so the retainer includes fixes, not just diagnosis
- A reporting cadence that matches what you're billing for, usually monthly, sometimes with a weekly digest in between
A Reddit thread on r/DigitalMarketing summed up the underlying pain well: manually checking prompts "doesn't scale past two clients," and most tools claiming to track AI visibility give inconsistent data once you push past a single brand. That's the bar any Searchable alternative needs to clear.
The best Searchable alternatives for agencies, compared
| Tool | Entry price | Agency/white-label tier | What it's actually good at | Watch out for |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Promptwatch | $95/mo (Essential) | Agency: $199 / $399 / $799/mo, unlimited projects and prompts, 10 seats | Crawler logs, content gap analysis, automated AEO article generation and CMS publishing, Reddit/YouTube citation tracking | More depth than a small agency strictly needs on the entry tier |
| Peec AI | $95/mo | $245 / $495 / $795/mo by client count (3-10, 11-25+) | Shareable client dashboards, pitch/prospecting projects, convert-pitch-to-paid flow | Thinner partner/referral program than dedicated agency platforms |
| Rank Prompt | n/a | Agency $149/mo (500 brands), Agency Plus $299/mo (1,000 brands, client portal) | Purpose-built agency economics, automated report delivery, prospecting tools | Smaller brand recognition than Profound/Scrunch |
| Profound | Free trial | Growth $99 + $399/mo per client workspace | Deepest multi-engine data, content creation, crawler-to-conversion attribution | Per-workspace pricing gets expensive past a handful of enterprise clients |
| Otterly.AI | $29/mo (Lite) | Standard $189/mo, Premium $489/mo | Cheapest per-unit entry point, simple setup | Agencies tend to outgrow it once the roster grows past a small book |
| AthenaHQ | $295/mo | Enterprise custom | Action Center turns data into prescriptive next steps | No free trial, per-brand pricing scales fast |
Promptwatch
Promptwatch is worth leading with because it's built around a different question than most of this list. Searchable, Otterly, and Peec answer "was my client's brand mentioned in ChatGPT this week." Promptwatch tries to answer "why aren't we visible, and what do we do about it," then actually does the doing.
For an agency, that distinction is the whole business model. Its Content Agents plan, write, and publish GEO-optimized articles straight to a client's Webflow, Framer, or WordPress site on a schedule, which means the monthly retainer can include real output, not just a report with red and green arrows. Unified Actions turns citation and crawler data into a prioritized task list, similar to Searchable's Actions feature, except Promptwatch's own agents can execute a chunk of it automatically instead of handing you an export file. The Agency plans start at $199/mo (Kickoff, 10,000 responses) and go up to $799/mo (Scale, 65,000 responses), all with unlimited projects, unlimited prompts, and 10 seats, which solves the per-client math problem that kills Profound and AthenaHQ for agencies running more than a handful of accounts.
It also tracks Reddit and YouTube citations and AI crawler logs (ChatGPTBot, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot, and 400+ others), which none of Searchable, Otterly, or most of this list do at all. If a client asks why their traffic from AI assistants dropped, crawler logs show whether the bots even visited the page, something a prompt tracker alone can't tell you.
Across 26B+ analyzed citations and prompts, Promptwatch's own research is a useful sanity check for client decks too. Its August 2026 domain-rank data shows DR 46-75 sites earned nearly half of all ChatGPT citations that month, which is a good talking point when a client with a mid-authority domain asks whether they even have a shot at AI visibility (see Promptwatch's citation share by domain rank data). The same report flagged Reddit's ChatGPT citation share collapsing from roughly 4% to 0.5% on August 14, 2026, which is worth knowing before you promise a client a Reddit-seeding strategy (full numbers at Promptwatch's Reddit citation data).
Peec AI
Peec AI has probably the cleanest agency tier structure of anyone on this list, explicitly priced for "boutique agencies managing 3-10 clients" ($495/mo Growth) and larger shops running "11-25+ clients" ($795/mo Scale). It includes consolidated billing across clients, shareable dashboards, Looker Studio templates, and a pitch-workspace feature that lets you run a free audit on a prospect before they've signed anything.
The honest limitation: Peec's agency tooling is built around pitch workspaces and unlimited seats, not a formal partner program with referral commissions. If you want a vendor actively sending you leads, this isn't it.
Rank Prompt
Rank Prompt markets itself directly at the agency-economics problem. Its Agency Plus tier ($299/mo) bundles a client portal, automated report delivery, and prospecting tools alongside support for 1,000 tracked brands, with a 7-day trial to test the workflow before committing. It's a smaller name than Profound or Searchable, but the pricing structure is genuinely designed around running a client book rather than a single brand bolted onto a team seat.
Rank Prompt
Profound
Profound has the deepest data of anything here, tracking every major AI engine daily on over a billion real user prompts, plus content creation and crawler-to-conversion attribution in one place. GR0 built its entire AEO offering on Profound and reportedly took one client from $1,000 to over $100,000 in monthly AI-answer-attributed revenue using it.
But the pricing tells you who it's for. Growth is $99/mo plus $399/mo per client workspace, which is manageable for a handful of enterprise accounts and brutal for thirty local or mid-market clients. If your roster is small and high-value, Profound is worth the premium. If it's large and volume-based, the per-workspace math works against you.
Otterly.AI
Otterly.AI is the cheapest credible entry point on this list, starting at $29/mo for 15 prompts. It covers ChatGPT, AI Overviews, Perplexity, and Copilot on every tier, with a Claude add-on if you need it. For an agency testing the AI-visibility-retainer concept with one or two clients before committing budget, it's a reasonable low-risk starting point.
The catch is exactly what Rank Prompt's own agency-scoring framework flags: agencies tend to outgrow Otterly once they scale past a small book, because there's no real prompt-volume intelligence or in-platform content generation to lean on as the retainer grows more ambitious.
AthenaHQ
AthenaHQ is worth a mention for its Action Center, which turns raw visibility data into prescriptive next steps rather than just a dashboard of mentions. Self-Serve starts at $295/mo for 3,500 credits.
It has no free trial and, like Profound, its pricing scales per brand, so the economics get uncomfortable fast once you're past a few accounts. Useful for a boutique agency with a handful of premium clients; less useful for volume.
What to actually charge clients for this
Tool cost and client billing are two different numbers, and it's worth keeping them separate when you're pricing a retainer. Monthly reporting as an add-on typically adds $200-$800 a month on top of whatever the platform costs you, and a monthly cadence is generally considered the right rhythm for AI visibility reporting, clearer for clients to digest than performance-based pricing tied to citation counts that move around week to week.
A useful sanity check on the inventory you're actually selling access to: ChatGPT cites roughly 5 sources per web-search response on average, about half of what Google AI Overviews cites (around 10), and Perplexity sits at a steady ~10 sources per answer with almost no week-to-week movement, according to Promptwatch's average sources per response data. That's a genuinely useful slide for a client who asks why their AI visibility fluctuates: Copilot alone has swung from under 2 sources per response to nearly 17 within weeks, so judging it on a single week's snapshot is close to meaningless.
It's also worth telling clients that AI search inventory isn't purely organic anymore. Ads showed up in an average of 20.1% of ChatGPT Search responses over the trailing 90 days through mid-August 2026, climbing to nearly 30% on a 30-day average, per Promptwatch's ChatGPT ad frequency data. That's a new budget line agencies can report on, or upsell against, in a monthly deck.
Making the switch
If you're migrating off Searchable mid-retainer, run the new tool in parallel for one billing cycle before you cancel anything. Pull the same client's prompt set into both platforms and compare citation counts; data sources and crawling methods differ enough between vendors that clients will notice a discontinuity in the numbers if you switch overnight without an overlap period.
For agencies specifically looking at GEO and AI-visibility tooling as a category rather than a single vendor swap, the directory at bestgeosoftware.com is a reasonable place to keep comparing options as new platforms launch through the rest of 2026.