Profound vs Otterly vs Peec: which AI visibility tracker fits

Otterly starts at 29 dollars, Peec near 95, Profound at 99. They all answer the same question, does an AI assistant mention my brand, but they meter on two axes the sticker price hides: how many prompts you track and how many AI engines you watch. Here is how to tell which one you actually need, and when a free hand-run grid is still enough.

Download the PDF guide

AI visibility tools all sell the same promise: tell me whether ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews and the rest mention or cite my brand when someone asks. Line up their entry prices, Otterly at 29 dollars, Peec near 95, Profound at 99, and they look like one product at three prices. They are not, because they do not meter the same thing. The sticker hides two separate dials, and which one matters depends on what you are tracking.

The same question, three positions

All three monitor a set of prompts across a set of answer engines and report where your brand shows up against competitors. Where they differ is who they are built for. Otterly anchors the accessible end, a low monthly price aimed at solo sites and small teams starting to watch AI search. Profound aims up-market: its cheapest plan tracks a single engine and its genuinely useful multi-engine tier costs several times more, which is a signal about who it wants. Peec, a Berlin company, sits in between and is the obvious first look for EU teams that want a European vendor.

What each charges in 2026

List prices as of mid-2026, and they move, so confirm the live tier before you commit.

Otterly: Lite at 29 dollars a month tracks 15 prompts; Standard at 189 tracks 100 prompts and adds API and MCP access; Premium at 489 tracks 400. Every plan covers ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, Perplexity and Microsoft Copilot; Claude, Gemini and Google AI Mode are paid add-ons. Annual billing takes about 15 percent off.
Peec: self-serve from around 95 dollars a month, with Pro and Advanced tiers above it (roughly 245 and 495). The tiers step up on projects, one, two, then five, more than on a single prompt count, which suits tracking several brands. Three engines are included per plan and extra engines are monthly add-ons; Enterprise is custom.
Profound: Starter at 99 dollars a month covers ChatGPT only; Growth at 399 (its popular tier) tracks three answer engines and adds content tooling; Enterprise is custom. Annual billing gives two months free, and Growth offers a free trial.

The two axes that actually move your bill

Every one of these prices on two dials at once, and comparisons that quote only the headline miss one of them. The first is how many prompts you track: the questions you want to check your brand against, like "best CRM for a small agency" or "cheapest EU course platform". More prompts, higher tier. The second, the sneaky one, is how many AI engines you watch.

The engine dial is where the cheap plan stops being cheap. Otterly bundles four engines but sells Gemini, Claude and Google AI Mode as add-ons. Peec includes three engines and charges per extra model. Profound puts the whole thing behind the tier: its 99 dollar plan sees ChatGPT and nothing else, so the moment you want Perplexity or Google in the picture you are on the 399 dollar plan. So the honest way to compare is to fix the engines you actually need first, then read the price, because a 29 dollar plan that needs three add-ons is not a 29 dollar plan.

The free baseline these tools are priced against

Before any subscription, there is a version that costs nothing. Write down the handful of prompts a buyer would actually type, ask each main assistant those prompts once a month, and record whether your brand appears and how it is described. That manual grid answers the only question that matters at the start, am I cited or not, for the price of an hour. Our own AI search visibility auditor and the guide on how to get cited by ChatGPT and Perplexity walk through building that grid and fixing what it finds.

What you pay a tool for is not the answer, it is the cadence: running that grid daily instead of monthly, keeping history so you can see a trend, benchmarking against named competitors, and alerting you when an answer changes. That is worth real money once AI visibility is a channel you report on to someone. It is not worth it while you are still finding out whether you have a problem. Run the grid by hand first; buy the tool when the manual version becomes the bottleneck.

Who each one is for

Otterly if you are a solo site or small team turning an occasional manual check into a standing report on a budget. Start on Lite, add engines only as you need them, and move up when 15 prompts stops being enough.
Peec if you want a European vendor or you track several brands, since it prices on projects as well as prompts. A sensible first look for an EU agency that would rather deal with a European supplier.
Profound if you are a larger brand reporting across many markets and answer engines, where the Growth or Enterprise tier buys breadth a solo site does not need. Overkill, and overpriced, for a single small site.

The point

These are not one tool at three prices; they are three bets on how many prompts and engines you need to watch, aimed at three different sizes of buyer. Decide the engines and prompts first and the price follows, and remember the honest floor: a monthly grid you run by hand is free and answers the first question. Use the auditor to build that grid, and only reach for a paid tracker when reporting the channel, not discovering it, is the job.

Frequently asked questions

Which AI visibility tool is cheapest: Profound, Otterly or Peec?

Otterly has the lowest entry, a 29 dollar Lite plan that tracks 15 prompts across four engines. Peec self-serve starts near 95 dollars a month and Profound at 99 dollars, but Profound Starter watches ChatGPT only, so its comparable multi-engine tier is the 399 dollar Growth plan. Cheapest on the sticker is not cheapest for the same job, because each meters differently.

Do these tools charge extra for tracking more AI engines?

Yes, and it is the cost most comparisons miss. Otterly covers ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, Perplexity and Microsoft Copilot on every plan, but Claude, Gemini and Google AI Mode are paid add-ons. Peec includes three models on each self-serve plan and sells extra engines as monthly add-ons. Profound gates engine coverage by tier: Starter is ChatGPT only, Growth adds more answer engines. So the real price depends on how many assistants you need to watch, not just how many prompts.

Is Profound self-serve or enterprise only?

It is both. Profound publishes self-serve plans, a 99 dollar Starter and a 399 dollar Growth, alongside a custom Enterprise tier, and offers a free trial on Growth. Some older reviews claim it went enterprise-only; its own pricing page still lists the two self-serve plans as of mid-2026, so check the live page before you decide.

Do I need a paid AI visibility tool at all?

Not to answer the first question. You can ask the main assistants your key prompts once a month and log whether your brand appears, which is free and tells you if you have a problem. A paid tracker earns its place once AI visibility is a channel you report on: it runs the grid daily, tracks history, benchmarks competitors and alerts on changes. Price that against the monthly grid you can run by hand for nothing.

Which AI visibility tool is best for a European team?

Peec is the Berlin-based option and sits between Otterly and Profound on price, which makes it a natural first look for EU teams that want a European vendor. That said, all three track the same global assistants, so pick on the two things that move the bill, how many prompts and how many engines you need, and on whether you want a European supplier, rather than on the flag alone.

Run the numbers for your own case

Every figure above comes from a free tool you can use in your browser, with no signup.

Check your AI answer-engine visibility

What to actually use

All three do the same core job; they differ on how many prompts and engines you pay for. Before paying for any of them, run the free grid below by hand for a month to see whether AI visibility is even a problem for you. If it is a channel you need to report on, pick by fit:

Otterly for the cheapest way to start reporting (coming soon)Lite at 29 dollars tracks 15 prompts across four engines, the lowest-cost way to turn an occasional manual check into a standing report. Watch the engine add-ons: Gemini, Claude and Google AI Mode cost extra, so add up the engines you actually need before comparing it to the others.
Peec if you want a European vendor (coming soon)Berlin-based, self-serve from around 95 dollars a month, and priced by projects (one, two or five) rather than only prompts, which suits an agency or team tracking a few brands. Three engines are included per plan and extras are add-ons, so price the engines you need in.
Profound for multi-market enterprise reporting (coming soon)Its useful multi-engine tier is the 399 dollar Growth plan (Starter watches ChatGPT only), and Enterprise is custom, so it fits larger brands reporting across many markets rather than a solo site. Try the Growth free trial before committing, and only if the manual grid has shown you a real gap.

If you buy through a link above we may earn a commission, at no extra cost to you. It never changes which option we call the cheaper or better fit; the math on this page is the same either way.

Get the next cost breakdown by email

We publish a new honest, tool-backed breakdown like this every few days. Leave your email and we will let you know when the next one goes up. One confirmation link, nothing else until you click it.