Every price below was read on the vendor's own pricing page. Every score was measured by running our audit engine against the vendor's own website. Both on 6 August 2026, and both checkable.
The best AI visibility tool depends on what you are buying. Rankscale starts at $20 a month, Otterly.AI at $29 and Knowatoa at $59; Profound, Scrunch AI and Athena sit at the enterprise end; HubSpot's grader is free. We scored all 11 vendors' own websites with our audit engine, and not one of them passed cleanly.
Running our engine against 11 vendors' own websites produced a more consistent result than we expected. These counts exclude our own site.
failed. Every single vendor. No visible date, no machine readable modified date, or both.
failed. No named author or identifiable publisher on the page an assistant would quote.
failed, and the category averages 50 out of 100 on schema. Half marks.
across the 11 vendor sites. One A, eight Bs and one C.
The pattern is worth being precise about, because the obvious reading is unfair. These are marketing sites, not the products, and a homepage that does not carry a byline is a normal homepage. Nobody is being caught out doing something disgraceful.
What makes it interesting is which checks fail. Freshness and attribution are not classic SEO hygiene; they are the two signals that generative engines lean on hardest when deciding whether a page is worth quoting, and they are the ones these vendors' own blog posts tell their customers to fix. A page with no date and no author is exactly the page their product would flag.
Structured data is the one that goes further than an oversight. Schema is how a machine learns what a page is about without guessing, and it averages 50 out of 100 across a category whose entire business is making other companies legible to machines.
Category averages across the 11 vendor sites, worst first. Our own site is not in these numbers.
Ordered by the cheapest way in. Price is what the vendor publishes, not what you will pay after seats and prompt limits, and the entry tier is rarely the comparable one.
| Tool | From | Best for | Their site |
|---|---|---|---|
| HubSpot AI Search Grader | Free | Finding out whether you have a problem at all, before spending anything. | 86B |
| Visibility100xours | Free, then $24/mo | Fixing the mechanical reasons a model never saw your page in the first place. | 99A |
| Rankscale | From $20/mo | The cheapest real entry point into ongoing monitoring. | 86B |
| Otterly.AI | From $29/mo | Small teams who want more than one person looking at the data. | 89B |
| Knowatoa | From $59/mo | Brands that need more than one market watched without a tier upgrade. | 90A |
| Writesonic | From $79/mo | Teams who want the fixing and the measuring bought together. | 85B |
| Profound | From $99/mo | Large brands that need SSO, compliance and nine engines covered. | 85B |
| Semrush | From $117.33/mo | Teams already paying for Semrush who do not want a second subscription. | 72C |
| Ahrefs Brand Radar | From $199/mo | Anyone who wants prompt volume data rather than only their own tracked set. | 80B |
| Athena | From $295/mo | Teams that want recommendations generated rather than only reported. | 86B |
| Scrunch AI | From $300/mo | Teams that need to model several buyer personas rather than one prompt set. | 79B |
| Peec AI | Not published | Agencies running several brands, if you are willing to ask for the price. | 81B |
"Their site" is our 36 check score for the vendor's own product page, not a rating of their product. A tool can be excellent and ship a marketing page that does not carry a date.
Every tier as published, the exact page we scored, and what it failed. Where a third party roundup disagrees with a vendor's own page, the vendor's page wins.
A free one off snapshot of how ChatGPT, Perplexity and Gemini describe a brand.
https://www.hubspot.com/ai-search-graderFailed: freshness signals, attribution signals. 10 warnings.
It is a snapshot rather than a monitor: you run it by hand and it does not track anything over time. That is the whole difference between this and everything else on the list, and at zero it is still the right first step.
Technical AI visibility auditing on your live pages, plus prompt tracking.
https://visibility100x.com/No failed checks. 0 warnings.
This is our own product, scored by our own engine, and it comes first on the list by that measure. Treat it as a control rather than a result: our site is built by the people who wrote the checks, so a full pass is the expected outcome and not evidence of anything.
Credit based tracking across eight engines with page audits bundled in.
https://rankscale.ai/Failed: freshness signals, page weight. 6 warnings.
One of only two vendors here that publishes a price for every tier including enterprise. Worth noting on a list where most stop at "contact us".
Prompt tracking across four engines with unlimited seats on every plan.
https://otterly.ai/Failed: freshness signals, canonical target. 6 warnings.
Unlimited team members on the $29 tier is unusual: most of this category charges per seat, which is what makes a cheap plan stop being cheap.
Citation and sentiment monitoring with every language and market included.
https://www.knowatoa.com/Failed: freshness signals, page weight. 5 warnings.
The highest scoring site in this list other than our own, and the only other A. Whoever builds their marketing site knows what they are doing.
Tracking across ten platforms plus an agent that rewrites pages for GEO.
https://writesonic.com/generative-engine-optimization-geoFailed: freshness signals, page weight. 7 warnings.
Our first run scored this page at 65/C. That run had hit a URL that did not exist. Corrected, it is 85/B. The wrong number is recorded here because a methodology that hides its own corrections is not one.
The enterprise end of the category, with agent analytics and SOC2 on the top tier.
https://www.tryprofound.com/Failed: structured data, freshness signals, attribution signals. 6 warnings.
Read the $99 tier carefully: it tracks ChatGPT and nothing else. The comparable plan against most of this list is the $399 one.
AI visibility folded into the SEO suite rather than sold as its own product.
https://www.semrush.com/ai-seo/overview/Failed: headings, structured data, chunk quality, freshness signals, attribution signals. 7 warnings.
The lowest score on the list, and the one worth being careful about: this is one product page from a very large site, not a verdict on Semrush. It is also the only page here that failed chunk quality, which is the check that asks whether a model can lift a clean passage out of it.
Brand mentions measured against a database of 271M+ organic prompts.
https://ahrefs.com/brand-radarFailed: structured data, freshness signals, attribution signals, page weight, response time, Core Web Vitals. 6 warnings.
Priced on top of an Ahrefs plan rather than instead of one, so the real monthly figure for a new customer is $199 plus whichever tier they need.
Nine models tracked, with a content agent and a citation engine on top.
https://www.athenahq.ai/Failed: structured data, freshness signals, attribution signals, canonical target. 4 warnings.
There is a genuine free tier here with 300 credits, which is more than a demo and less than a month of monitoring.
Persona based monitoring across seven surfaces including Meta.
https://scrunch.com/Failed: structured data, freshness signals, attribution signals, page weight. 11 warnings.
The old scrunchai.com now redirects to scrunch.com. Anything still linking the old domain is reading a stale roundup.
Six engines with multi project reporting, aimed at in house SEO teams.
https://peec.ai/Failed: structured data, freshness signals, attribution signals, page weight. 6 warnings.
Several roundups state $95 to $495 a month for Peec. Their own pricing page carried no figure on 6 Aug 2026, so this row says so instead of repeating a number nobody can source.
Prices. Every figure was read on the vendor's own pricing page on 2026-08-06 and is quoted in the currency it was published in. Nothing here came from another roundup. Where a vendor publishes no price, the row says so: several comparison posts state a monthly figure for Peec AI, their own pricing page carried none that day, and repeating an unsourceable number is how the rest of this category ends up all quoting each other.
Scores. The same audit engine behind our free audit, running the same 36checks against the vendor's own product page, on 2026-08-06, at concurrency 2. The concurrency matters and is not a detail: run faster and PageSpeed Insights throttles, which depresses performance scores and produces grades that are an artefact of the harness. The exact URL scored is printed beside every result.
A correction we are leaving visible. The first run scored Writesonic at 65 and Semrush at 71. Two of the URLs were pages that did not exist, and a 404 scores like a thin page. Corrected, Writesonic is 85. That mistake is recorded on Writesonic's row rather than quietly fixed, because a methodology that hides its own corrections is not a methodology. It is also the reason every URL is published: it is the field that makes this class of error findable by a reader.
What a score is not. It describes one page on one day. It says nothing about whether the product is any good, how accurate its tracking is, or whether it is worth its price, and a low score here is a marketing site observation rather than a verdict. Semrush's is the lowest on the list and Semrush is a serious product; those two facts do not conflict.
What we could not measure. Accuracy. Every tool here claims to tell you how often a model names your brand, and there is no reference answer to check any of them against, because generative answers are not deterministic. Anyone ranking these tools by accuracy, including us, would be making it up. That is the honest limit of this page, and of the category.
The raw engine output for all twelve sites is kept alongside the page. Ask and we will send it, or run the same audit yourself against any of these URLs and compare.
Most teams buy monitoring before they have established there is anything to monitor.
If GPTBot is refused in your robots.txt or your pages render as an empty JavaScript shell, no amount of tracking will change the answer, and both take a minute to find. Our AI crawler checker and render gap checker are free and need no account.
HubSpot's grader and our own audit both cost nothing. If the snapshot says you are named in most answers already, a monitoring subscription is a nice to have rather than the urgent purchase the category markets it as.
This is where the cheap plans separate. Profound's $99 tier tracks ChatGPT alone; Otterly's $29 tier covers four engines. Two entry prices three times apart can be buying opposite things, so compare the tier that covers what you need rather than the first row of the pricing table.
Otterly and Peec include unlimited team members; several others price per seat, which is what turns a $59 plan into a $300 one the month a second person wants a login. Ask before you compare monthly figures.
Most of this list measures and reports. If what you need is somebody to fix the render gap and publish the pages, a tool subscription will describe the problem accurately every month without moving it. That is a different purchase, and what it costs across the market is published rather than quoted.
The three that 11 of 11 vendors failed are free here, need no account, and take about a minute each.
We ran the same engine over 98 agencies selling GEO, with the same result: the checks a category most often fails are the ones it sells.
This page sorts the same vendors for a buyer deciding what to spend. If you would rather see them sorted by the work, the GEO tools compared by job splits generative engine optimization into the four things it consists of and shows which of them this category actually sells. To check where you stand before buying any of it, the free AI visibility checker puts your buying questions to ChatGPT and Claude live.
Want the concepts rather than the products? What AI visibility is and how it is measured, generative engine optimization, answer engine optimization and LLM SEO each get their own explainer.
There is no single answer, because the tools split by budget rather than by quality. Under $60 a month Rankscale, Otterly.AI and Knowatoa all track several engines properly. Above $300 you are buying personas, compliance and seats rather than better measurement. If you have not established that you have a problem yet, run a free check first and spend nothing.
Entry prices run from $20 a month at the low end to $300 a month before you reach the enterprise tiers, which are almost all quoted rather than published. Of the 11 vendors reviewed here, 10 publish a figure for at least one tier and one publishes none at all. Read what an entry tier covers before comparing two of them: the cheapest plan on this list tracks one engine.
Yes, and it is worth starting there. HubSpot's AI Search Grader gives a free one off snapshot of how ChatGPT, Perplexity and Gemini describe a brand, with no account needed. Athena includes a free credit allowance, and our own audit is free. What none of the free options give you is monitoring over time, which is the thing paid tools are actually selling.
We ran our own audit engine, the same 36 checks the free audit runs, against each vendor's own product page on 2026-08-06. The exact URL scored is published beside every result so any of it can be rerun. The score describes that one page, not the quality of the product behind it, and the methodology section says where that distinction matters.
Yes. We sell an AI visibility product and we appear in the table, so read the page accordingly. What we have done about it: the list is ordered by price rather than by our score, our own row is left out of every aggregate figure, and the method is published in full so it can be run against us. The scores are measured either way, and every price links to the vendor's own page.
Most of them measure. A few now generate recommendations or rewrite pages. None of them can open a crawler that your robots.txt is refusing or render a page that ships as an empty JavaScript shell, and in most audits we run one of those two is the actual reason a brand is absent. Measure by all means, but check the mechanical blockers first because they are free to find.
Free account, no card. Paste your URL and get a real, scored report of your AI and search visibility.
Measuring rankings in