Best AI visibility tools for agencies: UK pricing and how each collects data

Clients are asking their agencies whether they show up in ChatGPT, and a crowded market of trackers has grown up to answer them. This page sets out what 20 of those tools publish about price, how they collect answers and what they offer agencies, as read on their own pages on 1 November 2026. It is a comparison of published facts, not a ranking. The right tool depends on the job: a tool built to chart hundreds of prompts every week is the wrong tool for evidence a client will hold you to, and the reverse is just as true.

Prices are in US dollars unless stated, exactly as each vendor's pricing page or the cited article showed them on that date. "Est." marks a third-party estimate, not a published price. "Undisclosed" means the method was not stated on the pages read; it does not mean the vendor is hiding it. We re-check the prices monthly, and where a figure here differs from the vendor's own page, the vendor's page is right.

What to check before you choose

How the answers are collected

A tracker either drives the consumer interface (the ChatGPT app, Perplexity's website) with browser automation, or it asks the model through its API. The two routes measure different things: the consumer app adds its own system prompt, memory, personalisation and search behaviour, so the answers can disagree. One review of how AI visibility tools collect data argues that disclosure matters more than which route a tool takes, because a figure you cannot trace to its method is a figure you cannot explain to a client. The studies on how far apart the two routes are, and what each can tell you, are in our guide to the ChatGPT API versus the ChatGPT app.

The real meter: prompts, engines and projects

Most plans are priced by the number of tracked prompts, the number of engines asked and the number of brands or projects, not by seats. Dividing published plan prices by their prompt allowances gives roughly $1.2 to $2.0 per tracked prompt a month for Otterly, Peec AI, Promptwatch and Writesonic, about $2.7 to $4.0 for Goodie, and $0.6 to $0.9 for Scrunch. That is our arithmetic from their pricing pages, and it is the number to multiply by your client list and prompt sets before you compare plans.

Runs per prompt

AI answers change from one asking to the next. In a study SparkToro ran with Gumshoe, which sells a tracker, the same prompt produced an identical list of brands in fewer than 1 in 100 runs. SparkToro's follow-up argues that a rate measured over many runs is steadier than any single answer, and Ahrefs, which sells its own tracker, puts it plainly: "Think of AI tracking less like rank tracking and more like polling." Ask every vendor how many times each prompt is asked, how often, and whether each figure shows its denominator and the dates it covers.

White-label and client reporting

If the output goes to a client, check what the client sees and under whose name. SE Ranking sells an Agency Pack for an extra £49 with 30 seats and white-label; Rankscale offers white-label links on its Growth plan and above; Am I Cited offers white-label from €500; and Otterly's partner plan includes client and pitch workspaces with branded Looker reports. Promptwatch lists no white-label option.

Exports

In a 73-agency survey by Sitechecker, which sells SEO software, 67% of agencies used Looker Studio. If your reporting already lives there, an export or a Looker connector may matter more than another dashboard. Peec AI offers Looker Studio on its Advanced plan and above.

Seats

Seats are rarely the constraint. Of the nine tools whose pricing pages state a seat policy, six give unlimited seats (our count from the pages linked in the table below). Peec AI and Gumshoe both advertise unlimited seats, while Scrunch lists seats at $25.

Published prices and collection methods, side by side

As read on vendor pricing pages on 1 November 2026. US dollars unless stated.

Patterns across the table

Few tools say how they collect. Only four state whether answers come from the consumer interface or the API: Peec AI, Promptwatch and SE Ranking capture the interface, and Conductor is API-first. None of the others states its route on the pages read (BrightEdge's own pages were not read at all). For a figure you will put in front of a client, that is the first question to ask.

Nobody advertises sign-off. None of the pages read says that a named person checks each answer before a client sees it. The HubSpot grader, for example, returns a 0-100 score that no person has reviewed.

The meter is prompts, engines and projects. Seats are mostly free, so the cost of a tool grows with the size of your prompt sets, the engines you need and the number of clients you track. Do the per-prompt arithmetic above before comparing headline prices.

Independent criticism is thin. G2 reviewers of Otterly raise the learning curve, prompt caps and cost, and most of the other critical write-ups we found were published by competing vendors, including the reviews of Profound and AthenaHQ linked in the table. Treat any comparison, this one included, as a starting point for your own trial.

Tools versus a verified Sprint

These tools and AnswerLift's Visibility Sprint do different jobs. A tracker earns its fee on volume: hundreds of prompts asked daily or weekly and charted over time. AnswerLift does not track at that volume, and does not try to.

What it sells is sign-off. The Visibility Sprint asks your client's buyer questions of the models behind ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini and Perplexity through their APIs, via the OpenRouter gateway, plus five comparison models. Each question is asked three times of each engine by default and reported as "named in k of n runs", and there are no scores. A named reviewer signs off every record before it can reach your client's report, which is shared through a link that expires after 30 days. The methodology sets out exactly what is and is not measured: Gemini is asked without search grounding, and Google AI Overviews and the ChatGPT app are only ever recorded by hand.

That makes a Sprint a poor substitute for weekly tracking across a large prompt set, and a tracker a poor substitute for evidence that a named person will stand behind in front of a client. An agency can reasonably use both: a tracker for ongoing volume, and reviewed evidence when a client or a pitch needs a figure someone will defend.

For what UK agencies publish for audits, and how a £2,750 Sprint compares, see what a GEO or AEO audit costs in the UK. To see the output on one of your own clients before you buy anything, request a free AI Visibility Snapshot.

Questions to put to any vendor

• How is each answer collected: through the consumer interface or the API?
• How many times is each prompt asked, and how often?
• Does every figure show its denominator and the dates it covers?
• Can I read the raw answer behind any number?
• Who, if anyone, checks an answer before a client sees it?
• What does my client see, under whose name, and for how long?
• What can I export, and in what format?

Put them in writing and keep the replies. A vendor that answers all seven clearly has told you more about its numbers than any dashboard will.