AI Visibility Tools Compared in 2026, With Sources
We make Bevizio, which is one of the four tools compared here, so treat our view with care. There is no single best AI visibility tool, because these four suit different buyers.
This post compares Otterly.AI, Peec AI, Profound and Bevizio using each vendor’s own pages, as read on 29 September 2026, and says where each one is the better fit. To limit the bias, every competitor figure comes from that vendor’s own site, is dated, and is linked in the sources. Where a vendor’s own pages disagree with each other, we name the page or leave the point out. Prices change, so check the vendor’s page before you buy.
What each tool sells
| Tool | Entry price, as published | Engines | How answers are collected | How often | How results are shown |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Otterly.AI | Lite $29 a month on the monthly tab, $25 on the annual tab, 15 prompts. Standard $189 / $160 for 100 prompts. Premium $489 / $422 for 400 prompts. Its Help Center gives a 7-day free trial with no card; its Features page says 14 days, so check on sign-up. | ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, Perplexity and Microsoft Copilot on all paid plans. Claude, Gemini and Google AI Mode are add-ons; on Lite they cost $29, $9 and $9 a month. | “public web interfaces”; its Help Center says it uses an API only for Claude. | Daily. Its Help Center says this cannot be changed. | Percentages, counts, average position, and a net sentiment score from −100 to +100. |
| Peec AI | Starter €85 a month for 50 prompts, Pro €205 for 150, Advanced €425 for 350, billed monthly. Its FAQ says annual billing is 15% off. Its terms say prices are net of VAT and the service is for business customers. Its pages show a free trial but, as far as we could find, not its length or whether a card is needed. | You choose 3 of ChatGPT, Google AI Mode, Google AI Overviews, Microsoft Copilot, Gemini and Naver AI. Extra engines (Peec calls them models), including Perplexity, are €30, €70 or €140 a month by plan on monthly billing, and €25, €55 or €115 on annual billing. Claude is not among the models you can pick on the three self-serve brand plans; it is listed for Enterprise and for the higher agency tiers. | “UI scraping technology to interact with AI platforms exactly as real users do.” Its intro page explains why it does not use APIs, and its pricing table tags some Enterprise-only models “API”. | Daily on the self-serve plans. | Visibility (the percentage of responses that mention your brand), share of voice, average position, and a sentiment score from 0 to 100. |
| Profound | No public price for a brand plan. A free 7-day trial (50 prompts, run daily), then Enterprise at “Custom”. Client workspaces for agencies, on its Agency Growth plan, are $399 a month each. | Trial: ChatGPT, Gemini, Google AI Overviews. The pricing page’s Enterprise column lists up to nine, including Claude, Perplexity, Copilot, DeepSeek and Google AI Mode. Profound’s other pages give different lists. | “We capture directly from the browser—what you see in Profound is what your customers see when they query AI.” | Once a day. | Percentages and ranks. The visibility score is runs that mention your brand divided by runs that mention any brand; runs that name no brand are left out. |
| Bevizio | Growth $29 a month for 20 questions. Pro $79 a month for 75 questions. Annual billing is 10% off. A 14-day free trial with a card on file (a Pro trial checks 20 questions until the first payment). | ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity and Google AI Overviews on both plans, with no add-ons. Not Google AI Mode or Copilot. | Through a third-party data provider: API responses for ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini and Perplexity, and Google search results for AI Overviews. Not the consumer apps. Answers can differ from what a person sees in the app. | Each question 8 times a week, spread across the week: ChatGPT 3, Claude 2, the other three once. | Counts: “named in k of n answers”. No composite score. Answers that couldn’t be collected are left out of the total. |
Prices are the vendors’ own, in the currency each publishes, and we have not converted them. Otterly says its displayed add-on prices exclude tax, and Peec’s terms say its prices are net of VAT. Bevizio’s US prices exclude sales tax, and its local prices in the UK, Ireland and Australia include VAT or GST. Otterly lists a monthly and an annual price for each plan, so we show both. A “prompt” at the other three tools and a “question” at Bevizio are not the same unit, because Bevizio asks each question 8 times a week.
Where they differ more than price
The first difference is where the answers come from. Peec says API responses “often differ from what users see in the actual interface”. Otterly says API data “can be limited, filtered, or structured differently from what users see in real interactions”. Profound says it captures directly from the browser. Bevizio uses APIs and search results supplied by a data provider, and our terms say the answers can differ from the app. That is a trade-off, not a free choice. If matching what a person sees in the app matters most to you, ask each vendor how it collects each engine’s answers. Some vendors’ own pages describe more than one method: Otterly uses an API for Claude, and Peec tags some Enterprise-only models “API”.
The second is what the headline number means. Peec’s visibility is the percentage of responses that mention your brand, which is close to how Bevizio counts, though Bevizio shows the count itself. Profound divides by the runs that named any brand, so a run that named nobody doesn’t count for or against you. Two tools that both show “60%” can mean different things. We prefer a count because you can check it against the answers behind it, and we explain why in why we ask the same question 8 times a week.
The third is how often each tool asks. Profound has published its own study, run from 1 to 14 June 2026 on US prompts. It says once a day lands within about 2 percentage points of a reading taken ten times a day for visibility, across a large portfolio of prompts. It also says ten runs a day cut the noise in citation share by about 40%. We haven’t checked it independently. On raw volume, Bevizio is not the cheapest. Peec’s own pricing table counts 4,500 AI answers a month on its Starter plan, from 50 prompts, 3 models and daily tracking. Bevizio Growth is 20 questions asked 8 times a week, about 690 answers a month, on five engines. The two figures count different things, so treat the comparison as rough.
Where each may fit better
Otterly’s pages describe client workspaces, a Looker Studio connector, API and MCP access on Standard and above, and monitoring in many countries. Peec’s pages describe multi-country tracking, unlimited users and agency plans. Longer write-ups: Otterly.AI alternatives and Peec AI alternatives.
Profound’s pages describe enterprise buyers. They list SOC 2 Type II, single sign-on, dedicated support, licensed panel data on what people ask (“Prompt Volumes”), ChatGPT Shopping tracking, and analysis of AI crawler traffic from server logs. If you need any of that, Bevizio is not the right tool.
Bevizio is built for one product at a time. A solo or small-team founder who wants all five engines including Claude and Gemini included on both plans, with no add-ons, can use it. It has no agency features, seats or white-label reports. It has no public API or dashboard connectors, only a CSV download, and no Google AI Mode or Copilot. It measures only: it does not write or fix content for you. Questions are asked in English, and Google AI Overviews are checked from the United States.
To see what Bevizio shows before you pay, run the free check. Our pricing page has the current plans. Bevizio isn’t affiliated with OpenAI, Anthropic, Google or Perplexity.
Drafted with AI assistance. Every factual claim was checked against the sources above.
See whether ChatGPT, Perplexity and Google AI Overviews name your product. No account needed.
Run a free check