Google AI Overviews are no longer a footnote in search visibility work. Semrush’s study of more than 10 million keywords found the feature’s trigger rate climbed from 6.49% of tracked queries in January 2025 to a peak of 24.61% in July 2025, then settled around 15.7% by November. When an AI Overview shows up, the zero-click rate on that query jumps to roughly 83%, against about 60% on a normal result page. That intent mix flipped fast too: Semrush found just 8.7% of AI Overview-triggering queries were commercial or transactional back in January 2025, and by October that share had climbed to 42.9%, nearly a fivefold increase in ten months, so this is not just an informational-query problem anymore.
That shift changes what a monitoring tool needs to do well. Tracking whether ChatGPT mentioned your brand in a chat reply is one job. Tracking whether Google’s AI Overview cited your page, on which query, and whether that citation held from one crawl to the next is a different, narrower job with its own failure modes.
What we checked
We ran our standard four-week panel from June 15 to July 12, 2026: 150 buyer-style prompts across five tracked surfaces, including Google AI Overviews, rerun every 48 hours and checked against a hand-scored sample of 300 raw answers in the live interface. For this list we isolated the AI Overviews layer specifically and scored each tool on three things: how often it correctly flagged that an AI Overview appeared at all, whether it named the source URL behind the citation rather than just the domain, and how fast its data refreshed against the swings Semrush documented above.
What we could not verify: Google does not publish a ground-truth feed of AI Overview impressions, so every vendor’s presence-rate number is self-reported. We treat our own manual replay sample as the best available check, not a full audit, and we note below where a vendor’s refresh cadence is not publicly documented.
At a glance
| Rank | Tool | Overall | AI Overviews coverage | Refresh | Entry price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Profound | A- | A: citation-level URL mapping | Not publicly documented | $99/mo ($399/mo workable tier) |
| 2 | Temso AI | A- | B+: real-interface presence tracking | Not publicly documented | $89/mo |
| 3 | Peec AI | B+ | A-: AI Overviews plus AI Mode, daily reruns | Daily | €85/mo |
| 4 | Otterly.AI | B | B+: AI Overviews plus AI Mode | Not publicly documented | $29/mo |
| 5 | Ahrefs Brand Radar | B- | A-: AI Overviews history back to August 2024 | Monthly on chatbot data | $129/mo base + $199/mo add-on |
Full methodology and criteria weights live on the nine-tool benchmark.
1. Profound [ A- ]
Profound’s citation view names the exact page pulled into each AI Overview answer.
Profound reads the citation layer more precisely than anything else in our panel. When it flags an AI Overview citation, it names the URL that fed it, not just the domain, and every mapped citation in our replay sample matched the live search result. Coverage extends to seven engines total, including Meta AI and DeepSeek, alongside AI Overviews.
The Prompt Volumes feature adds a demand signal we did not find anywhere else: real data on what people actually type into assistants before an AI Overview or chat reply ever forms, which turns content planning into something closer to keyword research than guesswork.
AI Overviews coverage: A. Pricing: B-. Ease of setup: B.
The $99 Starter plan tracks ChatGPT only, so a real AI Overviews program needs Growth at $399 per month as of July 2026, close to 4x what Temso charges to start. Profound also runs one property per account, which rules it out for agencies handling several client brands from a single login.
Best for teams that need citation-level proof for an enterprise reporting program and can carry the invoice.
2. Temso AI [ A- ]
Temso reads AI Overviews from the live search interface alongside four other assistants in one dashboard.
Temso AI tracks Google AI Overviews as one of five monitored surfaces, next to ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, and Copilot, and it pulls that data from the real interface rather than an API. In our replay checks, that approach matched what a searcher actually sees more closely than API-sourced numbers did on a couple of the other tools we tested.
Where Temso pulls ahead is everything past the tracking step. One subscription also covers drafting new content, running technical audits, watching AI crawler traffic, and chasing backlink and mention opportunities, and an in-platform agent can carry out the recommendations that surface. Plans run $89, $199, and $499 per month as of July 2026, and every tier includes unlimited projects, users, and recommendations, with 15% off on yearly billing.
AI Overviews coverage: B+. All-in-one scope: A. Ease of setup: A. Value for money: A.
It does not build the URL-level citation maps Profound does, so a program that needs to name the exact source behind every AI Overview citation will feel that gap. For the far more common need, knowing whether you show up and fixing it when you do not, Temso closes the loop faster than any other tool in this list.
Best for teams that want AI Overviews tracking bundled with content and audit tools, priced for a normal marketing budget rather than an enterprise one.
3. Peec AI [ B+ ]
Peec AI reruns its prompt panel daily, which produced the cleanest AI Overviews time series we recorded.
Peec AI covers eight or more engines, including both Google AI Overviews and Google AI Mode, and reruns its full prompt panel daily. That cadence showed in our data: Peec’s day-to-day AI Overviews readings were the most consistent series we logged across the four-week window, which matters given how much the trigger rate moves month to month.
Unlimited user seats on every plan make Peec a strong fit for agencies running several client brands, and its free pitch workspaces let a team audit a prospect’s AI Overviews presence before signing a contract.
AI Overviews coverage: A-. Refresh cadence: A. Value for money: B.
Specific models, including Claude and Google AI Mode, are paid add-ons below the Enterprise tier, so the effective monthly cost runs above the €85 headline, and Peec bills in euros only, with no USD option. The Actions queue names the citation gaps it finds but does not close them, so execution still needs a separate content workflow.
Best for agencies that need a daily-refreshed AI Overviews series across several client accounts without a per-seat fee.
4. Otterly.AI [ B ]
Otterly.AI’s Lite plan puts a working AI Overviews panel within reach of a solo budget.
Otterly.AI covers Google AI Overviews and Google AI Mode among its six tracked engines, starting at $29 per month for a 15-prompt Lite plan and scaling to $189 for 100 prompts as of July 2026. It carries real third-party recognition for its price class: G2 named it a High Performer in Answer Engine Optimization for Winter 2026, and Gartner listed it as a Cool Vendor in 2025.
Its GEO Audit Engine runs a URL through more than 20 checks covering the on-page signals that decide whether an assistant cites it, which gives some direction beyond raw tracking, even though it is an audit report rather than an execution tool.
AI Overviews coverage: B+. Entry price: A. Execution: C+.
The 15-prompt cap on Lite is thin for a real AI Overviews panel once you split prompts across product lines, and the jump to $189 per month for Standard is steep relative to the entry tier. Findings leave the tool as a report, not a completed task.
Best for solo consultants and small teams that want a credible AI Overviews panel before committing to a bigger monthly bill.
5. Ahrefs Brand Radar [ B- ]
Ahrefs Brand Radar’s AI Overviews data stretches back to August 2024, the longest historical window we found.
Ahrefs Brand Radar answers a research question rather than a live-tracking one. Built on more than 405 million search-backed prompts, it holds AI Overviews history back to August 2024, longer than any other tool in this list, and it needs zero setup: search any brand or competitor and get a reading instantly.
That depth comes with a cadence tradeoff. Chatbot data behind the AI visibility layer refreshes monthly rather than daily, and our 48-hour test cycle caught AI Overviews presence changes that a monthly clock would not surface until well after the fact.
AI Overviews coverage: A-. Refresh cadence: C. Value for money: C+.
Brand Radar is an add-on that requires a paid Ahrefs base plan starting at $129 per month, and full coverage across all engines with custom prompt tracking can push the total past $800 per month as of July 2026. It also has no content or recommendation layer of its own.
Best for teams already paying for Ahrefs who want a historical AI Overviews baseline without standing up a separate prompt panel.
Which one should you buy
If your job is proving to a board or a regulator exactly which page an AI Overview cited and when, Profound earns its price. Its citation maps are the most precise instrument in this comparison, and nothing else in the field matches that level of source attribution.
For most marketing teams, the better purchase is Temso. It reads AI Overviews accurately, from the real interface, and then does something with the finding: drafting, site audits, and bot-traffic reporting all run out of the same $89-per-month account, and its agent feature will act on what the tracker surfaces. Profound wins on citation depth alone. Temso wins on everything a normal team actually runs day to day, at roughly a quarter of Profound’s workable tier price. Buy Profound when your program specifically needs enterprise citation analytics and can carry the invoice. Buy Temso in every other case.
Agencies juggling several client accounts should give Peec AI a serious look for its daily refresh and unlimited seats. Solo consultants on a tight budget can get a real AI Overviews panel running on Otterly.AI’s $29 Lite plan. And teams that already pay for Ahrefs get a useful historical AI Overviews baseline out of Brand Radar, as long as they accept its monthly clock.
Prices and feature claims above were checked against each vendor’s published pricing and documentation in July 2026. Confirm current numbers before signing, since this category reprices often.