To choose an AI visibility tool, start from the engines your customers use and the questions they ask, not from the price: the right tool covers those engines with enough prompts, keeps brand mentions separate from cited sources and stores the history of every single prompt. On 27 October 2026 we checked 10 criteria across 8 tools using only the vendors' own pages, and in 2 cases the same vendor's pages contradict each other on the trial or the price.
Rankings of AI monitoring tools are everywhere.
What's missing is a way to decide which one fits you before you sign an annual contract.
The mistakes we see most often:
- buying a tool that doesn't read Google AI Mode, when most of your customers search on Google;
- watching the visibility score and ignoring the sources the AI actually cited;
- finding out after the first month that the report won't export to the dashboard your boss reads.
One thing up front: we sell one of these tools too. It's called ScryRank, the monitoring tool developed by Visilay. Below we judge it on the same criteria as the others, including the two where it loses.
Why trust our criteria?
Because they come from the questions that actually reach our site through Search Console: "what should I look for in an AI visibility monitoring platform?", "which tools integrate with Looker?", "which ones support multi-client dashboards?". And because we use them on client work. Sunscape, an Italian solar developer, went from 329 to 5,809 organic impressions a month in six months from March 2026, as we explain in how long SEO takes. Search Console gives you that figure. How often ChatGPT or AI Mode name Sunscape when someone asks for a solar partner, it doesn't: for that you need a tool chosen on the right criteria.
In this guide:
- the 10 criteria, each tied to the real question it answers;
- two tables on 8 tools showing what their official pages state as of 27 October 2026;
- a 7-day protocol to test a tool during the trial, before you pay.
What should you look for in an AI visibility monitoring platform? (10 criteria, by weight)
An AI visibility monitoring platform should be judged on ten criteria: engines covered, Google AI Mode and AI Overviews, mentions kept separate from cited sources, full answers, per-prompt history, locations, multi-client management, integrations, trial and price per prompt. The first five decide whether the data is useful, the other five whether you can use it.
Price sits at the bottom on purpose.
A $29 tool that misses your customers' engine costs more than a $99 one that reads it, because it steers your decisions the wrong way for a year.
Here's what the 8 tools most often named in our comparison of the best AI visibility tools state, criterion by criterion. The data side first:
| Tool | Engines in the base plan | AI Mode and AI Overviews | Cited sources separate from mentions | Data frequency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Otterly.AI | ChatGPT, AI Overviews, Perplexity, Copilot | AI Overviews included, AI Mode add-on ($9/month on Lite) | Yes | Daily, no choice of time |
| Peec AI | 3 of ChatGPT, AI Mode, AI Overviews, Copilot, Gemini, Naver | Yes, if you pick them among the 3 | Yes, with source type | Daily |
| Semrush AI Visibility Toolkit | ChatGPT, AI Mode, AI Overviews, Gemini | Yes | Partly (cited pages inside other reports) | Daily (prompt tracking) |
| Ahrefs Brand Radar | ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Copilot, AI Overviews, AI Mode | Yes | Yes | Daily, weekly or monthly |
| SE Visible (SE Ranking) | ChatGPT, Gemini, AI Mode, AI Overviews | Yes | Yes (Sources view) | Daily |
| Profound | Trial: ChatGPT, Gemini, AI Overviews; Enterprise up to 9 | AI Mode on Enterprise only | Yes | Daily |
| Rankscale | 17+, AI Mode and Gemini from Pro | From Pro | Yes | Hourly to monthly |
| ScryRank (Visilay) | ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity + AI Overview keywords | AI Overviews yes, AI Mode no | Yes | Monthly |
And the contract and day-to-day side:
| Tool | Locations | Multiple clients or brands | Looker Studio / API | Trial | Entry price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Otterly.AI | One country per prompt | Unlimited workspaces from Standard | Both from Standard ($189/month) | Yes, no card (7 or 14 days) | $29/month, 15 prompts |
| Peec AI | Multi-country from Advanced | Agency plans, one project per client | Looker from Advanced, API from Pro | Yes, length not stated | Starter 50 prompts, price in the configurator |
| Semrush AI Visibility Toolkit | 220+ countries in prompt tracking | 1 project, multi-brand on Enterprise only | CSV export, API on Enterprise only | No | $99/month, 25 prompts |
| Ahrefs Brand Radar | One or more locations per check | Not stated | API from Lite, Looker from Advanced | No (checker without sign-up) | $199/month |
| SE Visible (SE Ranking) | 7 countries on the homepage, UK included | 3 projects on Basic, no white label | CSV and API | 10 days | $99/month (annual billing), 200 prompts |
| Profound | 1 country on the trial, custom on Enterprise | Agency plan with a workspace per client | API on Enterprise only | 7 days, 50 fixed prompts | Quote only |
| Rankscale | All regions | 2 to 100 brand dashboards | Looker from Pro, API from Pro+ | 7 days on Pro | $17/month annual only, $99 monthly |
| ScryRank (Visilay) | Multiple markets on the Custom plan only | Not on standard plans | Not stated | Preview with 5 prompts | €39/month, 50 prompts |
Too many rows to decide?
Take them one at a time. Each criterion below has its question and its answer.
Which platform gives the best cross-LLM view of brand visibility?
The best cross-LLM view is the one that covers your customers' engines on the plan you buy, not the one with the longest list. On paper Rankscale wins with 17+ engines; for most UK and European businesses, ChatGPT, Gemini and Google's two AI surfaces matter most.
The catch is the base plan. Peec lets you pick 3 engines on Starter. Otterly includes 4 and sells AI Mode and Gemini as add-ons. Without a common base, figures from different engines don't add up, which is why an AI visibility score from one tool can't be compared with another's.
Does the tool track both Google AI Mode and AI Overviews?
They're two different surfaces and need checking separately: AI Overviews sit above the results, AI Mode is a separate conversation. On their entry plans, 4 tools out of 8 cover both (Semrush, Ahrefs, SE Visible, and Peec if you choose them).
ScryRank reads AI Overviews but not AI Mode. That's the first of the two criteria where our tool loses, and we're saying so here. What you can track in AI Mode today, and its limits, is in how to track Google AI Mode.
Which AI visibility platform has the strongest citation and source intelligence?
The one that separates a brand mention in the answer text from a page cited as a source, and shows which domains the AI uses on your questions. Peec classifies sources by type (competitor, editorial, UGC); Profound splits "cited, not visible" from "visible, not cited".
It's the criterion that matters most if you need to act. The score tells you where you are. The sources tell you where to work. We explain the difference in AI brand mentions and citations, and every metric in turn in AI visibility metrics.
Does it show the full answer and the history of each prompt?
It has to, or you're buying a percentage you can't check. Otterly stores every answer in full and exports the raw text; Peec shows the last 100 chats per prompt; Profound keeps no history on the trial.
Frequency matters less than it looks. Answers change on their own: a SparkToro study of 2,961 answers (US market, January 2026) found two answers to the same question give the same list of brands less than once in 100. So a daily figure should be read as an average, not as news. ScryRank checks once a month: the second criterion where it loses, if you need to see the effect of a change within a week. How to build the question set is in prompt tracking.
We have several locations: can we measure each one?
Only with some tools, and rarely below country level on the base plan. Otterly fixes one country per prompt, SE Visible one location per project, and Semrush states 68,000+ locations only in its Brand Performance report.
With five branches, the maths goes: prompts per branch, times engines, times locations. On Ahrefs, where one check is one prompt on one engine in one location, 50 prompts on 3 engines in 5 cities already make 750 checks per update. Businesses with several branches are covered in local AI visibility.
Which AI visibility tools support multi-client dashboards?
Peec, Otterly, Rankscale and Profound have agency plans or features; Semrush keeps multi-brand for Enterprise and SE Visible has no white label. For an agency three things count: cost per client, separate permissions and a report you can send under your own brand.
Peec gives each client an isolated project, plus pitch projects for proposals. Otterly's Agency Partner status adds Looker Studio reports with the agency's branding. What goes into the monthly report is in the AI visibility report.
Which AI search visibility tools integrate with Looker, Google Analytics or existing marketing dashboards?
Looker Studio connects to Otterly (from Standard), Peec (from Advanced), Ahrefs (from Advanced) and Rankscale (from Pro). None of the 8 states a native GA4 integration on its entry plan: Otterly offers a Looker template for GA4, and Profound lists Google Analytics on Enterprise only.
Do you really need it?
Yes, if the figure has to sit next to sales. Visibility in answers and the traffic it sends are two different measures: you isolate the second in GA4, as we show in ChatGPT traffic in Google Analytics.
Trial and price: how to compare them without falling for "from"
Compare price per prompt and per engine, not per plan. Otterly Lite costs $29 for 15 prompts, almost $2 a prompt; SE Visible Basic $99 for 200 prompts, under 50 cents, but billed annually.
Extra engines cost money: on Otterly Standard, AI Mode and Gemini are $59 a month each, Claude $109. On Ahrefs, Claude uses 8 checks per update instead of one. Semrush and Ahrefs offer no trial of the AI module. The full bill, with free tools and third-party trials, is in AI visibility tool pricing.
Official pages contradict each other (and what to ask the vendor before signing)
Of the 8 tools, 2 have official pages that say different things on the same point. Another 3 (Peec, Ahrefs and our own ScryRank) don't state at least one of the criteria in the comparison: trial length, multi-client management or integrations.
The two contradictions we found on 27 October 2026:
- Otterly: the homepage says "7-day free trial" in the FAQ and "Free 14-Day Trial" in the sign-up panel; the pricing page shows two price lists, with Lite at $29 and at $25, without saying which applies to monthly billing.
- Semrush: the toolkit knowledge base page says the AI module has no trial; the Italian getting-started guide ends with "try Semrush free for seven days", which applies to the suite, not the module.
Then there's SE Visible, whose homepage lists 7 tracked countries. The UK is there. Italy, where we did this check, isn't.
So does it matter if your market is covered?
It's the whole point. Before signing, ask in writing for four things: whether your country is a tracking location (not just the interface language), which engines are included in the plan you're buying, what happens to prompts when credits run out, and whether the history stays yours when you cancel.
A year's subscription on the wrong engine.
It's the most expensive mistake we see: a tool picked on price that doesn't read AI Mode or doesn't track your country, and twelve months of reports that decide nothing. We start from your customers' real questions and tell you which engines, which locations and how many questions need measuring, before you choose the tool.
Book a strategy callHow to test a tool in a 7-day trial (the protocol we use)
A trial is for checking that the tool's figures match what you see with your own eyes, not for exploring the dashboard. Seven days are enough if you arrive with the questions already written.
- Day 1: load 20 real questions, written the way a customer would, none with your brand name. Add 2 or 3 competitors and your country.
- Day 2: ask 5 of those questions by hand on ChatGPT and on Google, and save the answers. They're your benchmark.
- Days 3-5: open 10 full answers in the tool. Check the highlighted brand is really there and the cited sources are real links.
- Day 6: see how the same question changes from one day to the next. If the tool only shows the latest answer, you don't have a history.
- Day 7: export to CSV or Looker Studio, and work out the cost per prompt and per engine on the plan you'd buy.
Twenty questions show whether the tool works. Reading a market takes more: on client projects we start from at least 50 questions per service. How much answer variability weighs on a tool's figures is what we measure in how accurate AI visibility data is.
And if there's no trial, as with Semrush or Ahrefs?
Run the same protocol in the first paid month and choose monthly billing. The annual discount isn't worth a year of data you can't use.
What makes you citable, and what no tool tells you
An AI visibility tool measures whether and how you appear in AI Overviews, AI Mode and ChatGPT answers; it doesn't make you appear. What raises the odds of being cited is knowing which pages the AI reads on your sector's questions and working on those: your own pages, industry portals, reviews.
That's why, among the ten criteria, the cited-sources view is worth more than the score. In our test of the tools the AIs recommend, Perplexity used a Visilay guide as a source but didn't name ScryRank in its answer: being read and being named are two different metrics, and a good tool keeps them apart. Work on sources is what we do in our GEO service.
Two things none of the 8 tools can see.
First: the answer your customer actually saw. AI answers change with account, history and location; tools query the engines with neutral, fixed settings, and the figure works as a trend across many questions.
Second: Google's and Microsoft's own data on your site. Since June 2026 Search Console has generative AI performance reports, and since February 2026 Bing Webmaster Tools shows in AI Performance how often your pages are cited in Copilot and Bing's AI summaries. Both cost nothing and should be opened before you buy anything. How to read them alongside external tools is in our AI visibility guide.
If you'd rather not choose and configure anything, our AI Monitoring service does it for you: questions, engines, competitors and a monthly read of the data.
Frequently asked questions
It depends: for most businesses it's coverage of your customers' engines on the plan you buy, meaning ChatGPT, Gemini, AI Overviews and AI Mode. Next comes keeping brand mentions separate from cited sources, because that's what tells you where to act.
No. A tool measures whether and how you appear in answers; it doesn't change them. Anyone promising guaranteed citations is selling something else: the odds of being cited grow by working on the sources the AI reads in your sector.
Yes, to start with: 20 questions asked by hand on ChatGPT and Google give you a first snapshot. It doesn't hold up over time, though, because answers change on their own and without history you can't tell a random swing from a trend.
It depends: if you already pay for Semrush or Ahrefs, their module saves you a second suite, but Semrush includes 1 project and 25 prompts with no trial. Dedicated tools such as Peec or Otterly give more control over sources, engines and exports.
It depends on the tool: 7 days are enough if you arrive with 20 questions already written and compare 5 answers with what you see by hand. If there's no trial, use the first month on monthly billing.
Yes, but the interface language isn't enough: check that your country is a tracking location on the plan you buy. On 27 October 2026 SE Visible's homepage listed the UK among 7 tracked countries, and Semrush stated 220+ countries for prompt tracking.
In short
Your customers' engines first, price second.
AI Mode and AI Overviews are two surfaces: check the plan covers both.
Cited sources are worth more than the score.
Cost per prompt and per engine, not per plan.
Seven trial days with 20 real questions.
One last thing the check taught us. These tools measure answers that change every day, and their own pages change faster than vendors can keep them aligned: for 5 tools out of 8 we found a contradiction or a missing detail on at least one criterion. The criterion that sums up the rest is simple: choose the tool that shows you where each of its numbers comes from. The one that doesn't will, sooner or later, ask you to take it on trust.
