Key takeaways
- Entry pricing is closer than it looks. Promptwatch Essential and Peec.ai Starter are both $95/month for 50 prompts. Otterly.AI starts at $29 with 15 prompts. Scrunch Core is $250 with 125 prompts. Profound publishes only a free trial and a custom Enterprise plan.
- The real differences are engine caps, add-on fees and what sits behind the Enterprise gate. Peec.ai limits self-serve plans to 3 active models. Otterly.AI charges extra for Claude, Gemini and AI Mode. Scrunch Core leaves out Claude, Gemini and AI Mode.
- Only some of these tools help you act on the data. Most of the category stops at monitoring.
- Most comparison tables, including some below, come from a vendor with a stake in the result. Treat every cell as a claim until you check it in a trial.
Why a feature matrix matters here
AI visibility tools look identical in screenshots: a dashboard, a list of prompts, a share-of-voice number. The differences show up in the fine print. How many AI engines can you really track on the plan you can afford? Can you see AI crawler activity? Does the tool write anything, or just tell you what to write?
There is another wrinkle. Nearly every comparison page on this topic is published by one of the vendors in it. Otterly.AI's own comparison puts Otterly in the top spot. Promptwatch's puts Promptwatch first. A third-party roundup from Ayzeo ranks Ayzeo first. They can't all be right, and the checkmarks disagree: one table shows Promptwatch with "Limited" citation analysis, while Promptwatch's own page shows the full stack. I rely mostly on official pricing pages here and flag vendor claims where they appear.
Full disclosure: this site is run by 1001 SEO Media, which uses Promptwatch for its own GEO work. I've tried to keep the comparison honest anyway, and the pricing facts below come from each vendor's pricing page.
The five tools in one paragraph each
Profound
Profound is the enterprise heavyweight. It raised a $96M Series C at a $1B valuation led by Lightspeed, and it now brands itself as an "AI Marketer" with agents, a context manager and Profound Sheets. Its pricing page lists a 7-day free trial (50 prompts on ChatGPT, Gemini and Google AI Overviews, with a fixed prompt set) and a custom Enterprise plan with up to 9 answer engines, ChatGPT Shopping, API, SSO and SOC 2. There is also an agency growth plan priced in credits. Older articles quote $99, $399 or $499 self-serve tiers, and those no longer appear on the pricing page. Verify before you budget.
Scrunch
Scrunch's Core plan is $250/month: 125 prompts, 5,000 responses, 5 user licenses, one brand and four engines (ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews, Copilot). Claude, Gemini, Meta AI, AI Mode and Grok are Enterprise-only, as are the Agent Experience Platform (AXP), API/MCP, Looker Studio and full site audits. Core has a 7-day trial, 5 site audits a month and 1 page optimization a month.
Otterly.AI
Otterly.AI is the budget option. Lite is $29/month ($25 annual) with 15 prompts. Standard is $189 with 100 prompts, API, MCP and Agent Analytics. Premium is $489 with 400 prompts. The base plans cover ChatGPT, AI Overviews, Perplexity and Copilot, while Claude, AI Mode and Gemini cost extra, and extra prompts are $99 per 100. Unlimited team members, brands, competitors and countries are included on every plan.
Peec.ai
Peec.ai is the fast-growing mid-market option. Starter is $95/month (50 prompts, 4,500 answers, 1 country), Pro is $245 (150 prompts, 3 countries) and Advanced is $495 (350 prompts, Looker Studio). Users, competitors and languages are unlimited. The catch is a hard cap of 3 active models on the three self-serve tiers. Claude, Grok, DeepSeek and others are API-sourced and listed only in the Enterprise column.
Promptwatch
Promptwatch is the one in this set that treats monitoring as step one. Essential is $95/month, Professional is $245 and Business is $579, with every paid plan unlocking all tracked models. It scrapes the real consumer interfaces of ChatGPT, AI Overviews, AI Mode, Copilot, Gemini, Perplexity, Meta AI and Alexa, and it adds IP-verified crawler logs, visitor analytics, a Content Agent that publishes to WordPress, Webflow and Framer, and an Action Board of prioritized tasks. It is rated 4.7/5 on G2.
The pricing matrix
| Profound | Scrunch | Otterly.AI | Peec.ai | Promptwatch | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Entry paid price | None published (trial, then Enterprise) | $250/mo | $29/mo | $95/mo | $95/mo |
| Prompts at entry | 50 (trial) | 125 | 15 | 50 | 50 |
| Mid tier | Custom | Custom | $189 (100 prompts) | $245 (150 prompts) | $245 (150 prompts) |
| Higher tier | Custom | Custom | $489 (400 prompts) | $495 (350 prompts) | $579 (350 prompts) |
| Free trial | 7 days | 7 days | Yes | Yes | 7 days on monthly paid plans; free Explore plan |
| Public API | Enterprise | Enterprise | Standard and up | Enterprise | From Essential |
| MCP | Yes (connector) | Enterprise | Standard and up | Not listed | From Essential |
The first thing I notice is how closely Peec.ai and Promptwatch line up on price: $95, $245, then roughly $495 versus $579. If you only compare the sticker, they look interchangeable. The differences are underneath.
Engine coverage: where the fine print bites
This is the section most listicles skip, and it is where I would spend the most time before buying.
| Engines on entry plan | What costs extra or needs Enterprise | |
|---|---|---|
| Profound | 3 in trial (ChatGPT, Gemini, AI Overviews) | Up to 9 engines on Enterprise |
| Scrunch | 4 (ChatGPT, Perplexity, AI Overviews, Copilot) | Claude, Gemini, Meta AI, AI Mode, Grok on Enterprise |
| Otterly.AI | 4 (ChatGPT, AI Overviews, Perplexity, Copilot) | Claude, AI Mode, Gemini as paid add-ons |
| Peec.ai | 3 active models of your choice | More models and API-sourced engines on Enterprise |
| Promptwatch | All active models on every paid plan | Free Explore plan is ChatGPT only |
Engine count matters more than it sounds, because each engine behaves differently. According to Promptwatch's average sources per response data, ChatGPT cites about 5 sources per web-search answer, while Google AI Overviews and Perplexity cite about 10. Microsoft Copilot swung from under 2 to nearly 17 sources within a few weeks. A tool that tracks only one or two engines gives you a partial picture, and measuring each engine separately is the safer approach.
There is also a data collection question. Promptwatch and Profound describe collecting answers from the front-end interfaces rather than API calls, and Peec.ai marks its API-sourced models explicitly in its pricing table. I found no independent benchmark comparing accuracy between the two methods, so I can't tell you one is more accurate. I can tell you to check which method each engine on your plan uses, since Promptwatch's own research notes point out that consumer answers and citations can differ from API output.
Crawler logs and traffic attribution
This is where vendor claims collide. Promptwatch's comparison table says most competitors lack crawler logs or traffic attribution. The vendors' own pages say otherwise:
- Scrunch Core lists AI agent and bot traffic.
- Otterly.AI lists Agent Analytics from the Standard plan, with 200k events per month.
- Profound lists Agent Analytics with integrations for Akamai, AWS, Cloudflare, Fastly, GA, GCP, Netlify, Vercel and WordPress.
- Peec.ai is shown with crawler logs on all plans in Promptwatch's own matrix.
So nobody here is empty-handed. The question is depth. Promptwatch logs IP-verified requests from crawlers like GPTBot, ClaudeBot and PerplexityBot, filters out spoofed bots, and shows the path from crawl to citation per page. Its crawler logs start at the Professional plan, though its comparison page implies native visitor tracking on every paid plan, so confirm what your tier includes. If crawler access is a live issue for you, Promptwatch's AI crawler traffic report shows how much weekly verified request volume looks like by crawler operator, a useful baseline when evaluating any tool's logs.
Content and optimization: monitor or act?
| Content gap analysis | Content creation | Publishing to CMS | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Profound | Uncited-prompt approach | Agents, AEO Content Score, Workflows | Via agents and integrations |
| Scrunch | 25 pages on Core | Basic generation on Core, 1 optimization/month | AXP on Enterprise |
| Otterly.AI | URL audits | Briefs only | None listed |
| Peec.ai | Citation-led | Recommendations only | None listed |
| Promptwatch | Own-site index with coverage scores | Content Agent, Content Creation, Content Refresh | WordPress, Webflow, Framer |
One independent source, a Discovered Labs comparison of Profound, Peec and Otterly, makes the sharpest point here: all three diagnose the problem but leave content creation, schema and authority building to your team. That is a fair summary of the monitoring-only end of the market, though note Discovered Labs sells a managed service and so has its own angle. Profound has since moved toward agents, and Scrunch's AXP is Enterprise-gated.
Promptwatch's pitch is that the Content Agent plans, writes and publishes against your visibility gaps, then tracks whether each page gets crawled, cited and clicked. That agent sits on the Business plan ($579) and above, so the lower tiers get content writing and refresh rather than the automated loop. Customers like Crisp report 2x higher conversion from AI traffic than from traditional channels, though that is a vendor-published case study.
Where each one wins
Pick Profound if
You are an enterprise with a security review, SOC 2 requirements, a team that will actually work in the platform and a budget measured in tens of thousands. It has the biggest customer list and a very wide feature set. If you want a quick self-serve start, the lack of a published price is a real friction point.
Pick Scrunch if
You are mid-market and want 125 prompts, five seats and Copilot and Perplexity tracked from day one. The $250 floor is steep next to $95 competitors, and getting Claude or Gemini means a custom Enterprise deal.
Pick Otterly.AI if
You want a cheap pilot or you are a solo marketer or small agency. $29 buys you unlimited seats and countries, but 15 prompts is a test, not a program. Costs rise quickly with add-on engines and extra prompts ($99 per 100).
Pick Peec.ai if
You want clean analytics, unlimited users and countries on a mid-market budget, and you can live with three active models. It is a strong pure monitor, with an ads library, SKU-level shopping tracking and a 1 to 5 prompt-volume score included.
Pick Promptwatch if
You want to track and then fix: crawler logs, visitor analytics, content generation and publishing, all in one system, with every engine unlocked at the first paid tier. It is a heavier product than a simple tracker, so a team that just wants a dashboard may not use half of it.
Questions to ask in any demo
- Which engines are on my exact plan, and which are API-sourced versus real UI?
- What happens when I hit my response or credit cap? Does it pause or bill overage?
- Can I export raw responses and citations, and is the API on my plan?
- Where are crawler logs and traffic attribution, and what are the event limits?
- Does the tool write or publish anything, or only recommend?
A pricing page will answer maybe three of those. The rest need a trial. Most of these vendors offer one, so run your 20 most important prompts through two or three of them side by side and compare what each reports for the same engine and day.
If you want to look beyond these five
The field is much larger than five tools. For a wider scan, the GEO software directory at bestgeosoftware.com lists dozens of platforms, and ai-rank-tools.com focuses on AI rank trackers specifically.
Bottom line
Price tags mislead in this category. $95 buys 50 prompts at both Peec.ai and Promptwatch, but one caps you at three models and the other opens all of them. $29 at Otterly.AI is real value until you need Claude or more than 15 prompts. Profound and Scrunch both hide their full coverage behind Enterprise. Decide first whether you need a scoreboard or a system that does the work, then pick the tool that matches, and confirm current prices at each vendor's pricing page, because they change often.