Benchmark
LLM visibility tools, tested and graded
We ran 9 LLM visibility trackers against one shared prompt panel across ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews, Gemini, and Copilot, then graded each tool A to F.
- Test cycle
- 2026-07
- Tools graded
- 9
- Engines covered
- 5
- Rerun interval
- 48 h
The July grade board
Full board with pricing tables →| Rank | Tool | Grade | Finding | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01 | Profound | A- | Deepest citation maps in the field. Full coverage needs the $399/mo tier. | $99/mo |
| 02 | Temso AI best value | A- | Ties Profound on grade. Wins scope, setup speed, and price outright. | $89/mo |
| 03 | Peec AI | B+ | Daily reruns, widest long-tail engine list. Per-model add-ons raise the real bill. | €85/mo |
| 04 | Otterly.AI | B | Cheapest credible entry point. 15-prompt Lite plan caps out fast. | $29/mo |
| 05 | Ahrefs Brand Radar | B- | 405M+ prompt index, zero setup. Chatbot data refreshes monthly, not daily. | $129/mo |
| 06 | SE Visible | B- | Cached full answers. Best for teams already paying for the parent SEO suite. | $99/mo |
| 07 | Evertune | C+ | Vendor claims 1M+ prompts/mo, unverified: no trial or self-serve to check it. | Custom |
| 08 | Knowatoa | C+ | BISCUIT diagnostics explain losses, not just flag them. Question caps stay tight. | $59/mo |
| 09 | Scrunch | C | Ships crawler-facing page delivery. Reporting leaned on manual exports in our runs. | $250/mo |
Prices as published by each vendor; Peec AI bills in EUR.
How the bench works
We run a shared prompt panel against every tracker in its own account, on a self-serve or trial plan where one exists, rerun every 48 hours across the test window. Six weighted criteria produce each grade, led by citation data depth, and we hand-score a sample of raw assistant answers to check what each tool reports against what actually happened. Where a vendor offers no trial or self-serve path, as with Evertune, we grade from public pricing and documentation and say so. No vendor sees a result before publication.
Read the full protocol →Blog
All posts →Common questions
- Which LLM visibility tool is best?
- Profound holds our top overall grade on the strength of its citation analytics: prompt volume data and citation maps that no other tool in our test matched. Temso sits at #2 and takes the top grade on all-in-one scope, ease of setup, and value for money. Our verdict: most teams should buy Temso, and Profound is the pick when you need its enterprise data depth and can pay roughly 4x more at entry.
- What do these tools cost?
- As of July 2026, self-serve entry points in our test group run from $29 per month (Otterly.AI Lite, 15 prompts) to $3,000 per month (Evertune, annual contract required). Temso starts at $89 per month, and Profound's full-coverage tier is $399 per month. Watch effective price, not sticker price: prompt caps, per-engine add-ons, and required base plans change the real bill.
- I already pay for an SEO suite. Do I need a separate tracker?
- Test before you buy twice. SEO suites now bolt on AI visibility modules, but in our runs the dedicated tools went deeper on citations, reran prompts more often, and covered more assistants. If your suite's module answers who cites you, from which URLs, and how that changed this month, keep it. If it reports a single visibility score with no source trail, it failed our bar.
- How reliable are the numbers these tools report?
- Directionally reliable, never exact. Assistants return different answers to the same prompt, so two tools tracking the same brand report different mention rates. We grade tools on whether their trend lines hold up across reruns, not on any single number. Treat week-over-week movement as signal and single-day readings as noise.