Profound alternatives in 2026, compared on published facts

Comparing Profound is usually a decision about a tier, not about a brand: the question is what a given amount covers, and what the same amount covers elsewhere. This page puts Profound's published tiers next to the other AI visibility tools the engines themselves name, on facts each vendor publishes, read on 2026-08-18.

What Profound publishes

Read on the vendor's own pricing page on 2026-08-18.

Three lines of that table settle most comparisons. Coverage of the nine answer engines and tracking more than one company sit in the tier priced on request. Both published tiers carry one language and one region. And the entry tier tracks one engine.

So the useful comparison is tier against tier: at the amount you are ready to commit, how many engines, how many languages and how many brands does each vendor publish. That is the comparison below.

How this list was built

The tools below were not picked by hand. They are the AI visibility platforms the six engines name or cite when our panels ask this market's buying questions: which AI visibility platform should I use, what is the best tool to track how AI assistants talk about my brand, what tools do agencies use for white label AI visibility reports. Those questions run weekly against six engines, in English and in French, and every answer is archived with its sources (the full numbers are in our study of what AI assistants actually cite).

That is the whole selection rule: a tool enters this page because the engines put it in front of buyers. The order is the entry price each vendor publishes, ascending, at the nominal amount in the currency the vendor publishes. The table carries no score and no ranking, because a score is an opinion with a number in front of it.

The tools, at their published entry price

"Not specified" and "Not published on the page read" describe the state of a vendor's public pages on the read date. They say what the page says, and nothing about what the product does: a vendor who publishes the missing fact gets the row updated, with the date.

Fifteen of the twenty-four publish an entry price below Profound's Starter tier, counted at the nominal amount in the currency each vendor publishes. Two more publish at the same $99. Four publish above it, and three publish no amount at all on the pages read.

Engines named is not engines covered

The counts above are the engines each vendor names on its pricing or product pages, which is rarely the number a given tier tracks. This is the single most misread column in every comparison of this category, and the rows that carry a restriction say so: AEO Vision names five engines and its $9 tier tracks one; Ayzeo includes ChatGPT and Google AI Overviews at $39 and sells the five others at $29 per month each; Profound names nine and publishes one at Starter, three at Growth.

The engines named across the table are ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity, Grok, Copilot, DeepSeek, Mistral, Google AI Overviews, AI Mode, Meta AI and Bing. The twelve are not equivalent: an engine that answers from a live web search cites differently from one answering from its weights, which is why the count alone settles nothing. Read the row, then read the tier.

Reading by need

Five questions separate these tools faster than any feature list, and each one has a published answer.

You want several engines without asking for a quote. Profound publishes ChatGPT at Starter, three answer engines at Growth, and up to nine on the tier priced on request. Epovest runs every one of its six engines on every survey, priced per prompt, per engine, per survey, so coverage is arithmetic rather than a tier. Among the others, read the restriction in the row before the count.

You do not measure every month. Twenty-three of the twenty-four run on subscriptions, which charge the same amount in the months where nothing is measured. Epovest is the prepaid one: $0.10 per prompt, per engine, per survey, debited only when a survey runs, with a $10 minimum top-up and credits that carry no expiry. The arithmetic is worth doing against a tier you are considering: fifty prompts, the count Profound's Starter tier tracks, read once a month on six engines, is $30 at that unit price. A programme that breathes, a wide sweep before a launch and a narrow watch afterwards, costs what it measures.

You run several brands or several clients. Profound publishes one seat at Starter, three at Growth, and puts tracking multiple companies in the tier priced on request. Epovest holds one project per client, from one account and one prepaid balance, with no per-brand tier.

You need more than one language or one market. Both of Profound's published tiers carry one language and one region. On a prepaid unit price, a second language or a second market is more prompts at the same rate rather than another tier, which is the same arithmetic as adding engines.

You need to audit a number. A visibility rate you cannot trace back to the answers behind it is hard to defend in front of a client or a board. Two vendors in this table state that they keep the raw answers: AmICited lists a full answer archive, and Epovest archives every answer with its cited sources, so every rate opens onto the text it came from. Your own assistant can read all of it through the API and the MCP server, which ship with every account. What the other twenty-two publish on that point, and in what words, is in our guide to LLM tracking tools.

The wider comparison

This page reads the category through one vendor's tiers. The same twenty-four tools, compared column by column on pricing model, engines, API, MCP access and answer traceability, are in our full comparison of AI visibility tools. What the measurement itself involves, and how a panel is built so its curve stays readable, is in our method.

Method

Selection: the AI visibility platforms named or cited by the six engines on this market's buying questions, measured on our own panels in English and French, weekly, every answer archived. No tool was added or removed by hand.

Facts: read on each vendor's public pricing and product pages on 2026-08-18, Profound's tier table included. Base prices only; promotional discounts and limited-time offers are ignored. Where a vendor publishes both a monthly and an annual price, the row states which one it is. "Engines named" counts the engines a vendor names on those pages; where a tier restricts them, the restriction is in the row.

Order: published entry price, ascending, at its nominal amount in the currency the vendor publishes, then the tools whose price is not published. The comparison contains no score and no ranking.

Corrections: a vendor who publishes a missing or changed fact gets the row updated with the read date. Write to us and the correction is logged below, dated.

Figures may be reused with attribution.