Dashboards measure. We close the loop.
There are excellent tools in this category, and for the audiences they serve we would recommend several. Here is where each option fits, honestly, and where the engine is deliberately different: the measurement plus the hands that do the work.
The landscape, in one table
What we do versus what they do
 AI Visibility Engine | GEO agencies | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Built for | Local and regional businesses: healthcare practices, nonprofits, professional services, multi-location operators | Fortune 500 and enterprise brands with in-house teams | Content teams and SEO writers; AI tracking added onto a content optimization suite | Marketing teams and SEO agencies that want to run their own dashboards | B2B, SaaS, and enterprise content programs |
| AI engines measured | Eight: ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews, Google AI Mode, Copilot, Grok | Ten or more on enterprise plans; entry tiers track fewer | Five: ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, Google AI Mode, Gemini, Perplexity. No Claude, Copilot, or Grok | Three to seven, capped by plan; some engines cost extra | Varies with the tooling the agency licenses |
| What you actually see | A Battle Map: every buyer question scored on every engine, win or loss, with the engine’s verbatim answer as the receipt | Prompt dashboards, citation analytics, prompt volume data | Visibility score, mention rate, average position, share of voice, sentiment, citation sources. Daily refresh on higher plans | Prompt lists, mention charts, source breakdowns | Typically a monthly deck summarizing activity |
| Wrong-claim defense | Every factual claim AI makes about you is audited monthly, corrections are written and published, and a weekly accuracy watch catches new claims between audits | Sentiment and citation tracking; corrections are your job | Sentiment and mention gaps; accuracy auditing and corrections are not offered | Sentiment scoring on higher plans; corrections are your job | Not a standard deliverable |
| Who does the work | Your choice: DIY from our diagnosis and content briefs, or done-with-you, where we write the content, you approve every word in the portal, and we publish | You operate the platform; content tools on higher tiers | You operate the editor and write (or generate) the content yourself; “Optimize from AI Tracker” links a losing prompt to their editor | You operate the tool and do all optimization yourself | Agency does the work on retainer, usually enterprise-priced |
| Getting your name right | Your brand and its variants resolve to one entity, and so do your competitors. “The EMDR Institute” and “EMDR Institute, Inc.” both count as you. A founder’s name is measured separately and reported beside your mention rate, never folded into it: we found that error in our own data and fixed it, because an answer that names the person who invented your field is not the same as an answer that names your organization. | Entity handling is not documented publicly; enterprise onboarding defines the brand set | Entities are auto-extracted per prompt. In a live account we ran, one client appeared as two competing brands, the top competitor was split sixteen ways, books and directories were counted as brands, and the founder was tracked as a rival to the institute she founded | Usually a single brand string you type in; variants are missed silently | Depends entirely on who set up the tracking |
| Whether the number holds still | Every engine gets every question multiple times each month, and any cell where the samples disagreed shows the count on the tile, so a result won three times out of three is never displayed as if it were the same as one won once. Last month 8.6 percent of multi-sample cells came back differently from one ask to the next, and we publish that figure rather than average it away. | Enterprise sampling methodology is not published | Prompts are tracked over time; the per-run sample count and the spread are not surfaced in the report | Typically one pull per prompt per run, presented as a ranking | However the underlying tool does it, usually unstated |
| Where the questions come from | We build the panel from the questions your buyers actually ask, drafted from your market and your competitors, then show you every one and let you propose more. The questions you never thought to ask are the whole point. | Prompt sets configured during enterprise onboarding | You supply the prompts | You supply the prompts. A competitor in this category answered the question plainly on Reddit this month: prompt selection is still user-driven, and smarter discovery is something they are considering | Whatever the agency decides, often invisible to you |
| Client context that compounds | The Context Ledger: every verified fact, voice rule, proof point, and never-true guard about your business, provenance-stamped, fed by every monthly audit and correction, and read by every draft, every writer, and your schema markup. It grows every month you are measured, and you receive it as a branded PDF at quarterly reviews. | Knowledge base features on enterprise tiers; you maintain it | Brand knowledge and voice features you populate and maintain yourself | Prompt lists; brand context lives in your head or your docs | Institutional knowledge that lives with your account manager |
| Month over month | The same question panel re-measured every month, so movement is real: share of voice, mention rate, recommended-first rate, wrong claims resolved, with a movement report tying published work to flipped cells | Dashboards update continuously; you build the narrative | Prompts rechecked daily or weekly; trend depends on your prompt hygiene, and you build the narrative | Charts update; trend depends on your prompt hygiene | Reporting cadence and rigor vary by shop |
| Proof it mattered | Google Analytics joined to the visibility numbers: AI referral sessions and conversions reported next to the map, honestly labeled a floor, not a total | GA4 integration on enterprise plans | Looker Studio reporting of visibility metrics; not joined to conversions | Rarely connected to outcomes | Revenue case studies at enterprise scale |
| Human review | A person reviews every question panel, every draft, and every correction before anything ships | Software, self-serve | Software, self-serve; AI-generated articles ship as fast as you click | Software, self-serve | Depends on the agency |
| Price posture | Three plan tiers: Measure (DIY), Defend (DIY with briefs and the weekly watchdog), Win (done for you). Priced for small and mid-size organizations; pricing discussed in a demo, on your own data. | Self-serve entry around $99 per month; enterprise by quote, commonly quoted in the thousands per month | Published list: roughly $49 to $299 per month annual billing; AI Tracker standalone around $158 per month | Roughly $29 to $495 per month with seat and engine limits | Commonly $3,000 to $10,000 per month |
Competitor details come from public vendor sites and published reviews as of July 2026 and may change; verify current offerings with each vendor. Profound, Surfer, Peec AI, and Otterly are strong products for the audiences they serve. This table exists so you can pick the right kind of help, including when that is not us.
Why this is a model, not a dashboard
The same seven steps, every month, for any business
Tools hand you numbers and leave. Agencies do work you cannot inspect. The engine is a loop you can watch turn, and it is identical for a four-location practice or a community foundation: the questions change, the loop does not.
1. Intake
Your business, your territories, your competitors. A person verifies all of it.
2. Panel
Twenty buyer questions built around your actual service areas, versioned so the trend never breaks.
3. Measure
Eight engines answer every question. Every answer is kept as evidence.
4. Battle Map
Every cell is a win, a loss, or unclaimed ground, with receipts.
5. Diagnose
Why each loss happens and which source would flip it.
6. Publish
DIY from our briefs, or we write it and you approve every word.
7. Re-measure
Next month, the same questions. The map shows what moved.
Two ways to run the loop
Do it yourself, or do it with us
DIY: your hands, our map
You get the monthly measurement, the Battle Map with receipts, the diagnosis of every lost question, and content briefs that say exactly what to publish and why. Your team writes and ships. Next month's map grades the work. Best when you already have a writer and want the targeting.
Done with you: we write, you approve
Everything in DIY, plus we draft the content and the wrong-claim corrections. Nothing publishes without your approval in the portal, where every unverified fact is a placeholder only you can resolve. We publish, then the next measurement shows what changed. Engines decide what they cite, so we never promise placement; we publish, re-measure, and show the movement either way.
Start where every engagement starts: a measurement
We run your measurement before the call, so the demo shows you the map: which buyer questions you win, which a competitor owns, and what the engines get wrong about you today.
Book a Demo