AI Search Visibility Monitoring Tools for Business: ChatGPT Mentions in Profound, Otterly, and Peec AI
A procurement view of ChatGPT mention monitoring: contract terms, trials, seats, accuracy checks, and a scoring sheet for Profound, Otterly, Peec AI, and the platforms ranked above them.
When a business buys ChatGPT mention monitoring, the shortlist often arrives already written: Profound, Otterly, Peec AI. Those are the names that come up in roundups. Procurement then has to turn three logos into a contract, and that's where the differences show. Billing terms, trial length, seat counts, and how accurate the mention data is turn out to matter more than which dashboard looks nicer.
This guide is for the person who signs. It covers the business case in plain numbers, the contract terms for each vendor, an accuracy test you can run before paying, and a scoring sheet. We rank Promptwatch first and include two dedicated platforms, AthenaHQ and Scrunch AI, above Profound. Otterly.AI and Peec AI come last for the reasons below.
The business case, without invented numbers
ChatGPT reports 820M+ weekly active users. Some of them ask it which vendor to choose in your category. You can't see those conversations in your analytics, and when a recommendation doesn't produce a click, nothing in your stack records it. Mention monitoring runs a fixed set of buyer questions on a schedule and records whether you were named, where in the answer, how you were described, and which competitors appeared instead.
That's the case. Be wary of any vendor pitch that attaches a revenue figure to mentions without showing how it was measured. A defensible internal business case says what will be measured and who acts on it, and then sets a review date.
Contract terms side by side
| Rank | Tool | Entry price | Billing | Trial on listing | Seats at entry | ChatGPT at entry |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Promptwatch | $95/mo (Essential) | Monthly; annual is 12 months for the price of 10 | 7 days on Essential; free Explore tier | 1 (Essential) | Yes, plus other engines |
| 2 | AthenaHQ | $295/mo ($245 annual) | Credit-based usage | Free tier with roughly 300 credits | Unlimited | Yes |
| 3 | Scrunch AI | $300/mo ($250 annual) | Prompt credits per engine | Not listed | 3, extra seats $25/mo | Yes |
| 4 | Profound | $99/mo | Annual only | 7 days on Growth | 1 (Starter) | ChatGPT only on Starter |
| 5 | Otterly.AI | $29/mo ($25 annual) | Monthly or annual | Free trial, no card | Unlimited | Yes |
| 6 | Peec AI | $95/mo | Not detailed | Not listed | Unlimited | If chosen among 3 models |
Three lines in that table deserve a closer look. AthenaHQ's credit model makes the monthly cost hard to forecast; G2 reviewers on its listing report using a month's credits in the first week. Profound's annual-only billing means the $99 Starter is a $1,188 commitment for a ChatGPT-only, 50-prompt plan, and the broader engine list sits on Enterprise from around $40k a year. Peec's sticker price covers three models; additional models cost $35 to $165/mo each, and its listing estimates real bills land 30 to 50 percent above list.
Accuracy is a procurement issue
A mention tool that miscounts is worse than none, because people will make decisions based on it. Our listings flag specific risks. Profound's G2 reviewers report citation counts that don't match manual ChatGPT checks. Otterly's monitoring data can be up to seven days stale, and its sentiment has been caught labeling neutral mentions as positive. Peec has no historical backfill, so you can't check its first month against anything earlier.
How data is collected also matters. Some tools query model APIs, which don't always return what a user sees in the ChatGPT app. Ask each vendor whether it monitors the real ChatGPT interface or an API, and get the answer in writing.
An accuracy test to run before signing
- Choose 15 prompts buyers in your category really ask.
- Load them into each tool on the trial or cheapest plan.
- On the same day, run each prompt by hand in ChatGPT in a clean session and note whether you were named and in what position.
- Compare. Count matches, misses, and false positives per tool.
- Repeat once a few days later, because answers vary between runs.
This takes an afternoon and tells you more than any sales deck. Keep the results with the contract.
A scoring sheet
Score each tool from 1 to 5 on each row, and weight the rows to suit your business.
| Criterion | What a 5 looks like |
|---|---|
| Mention accuracy | Matches hand checks in your test |
| Engine coverage at the price you'll pay | ChatGPT plus the other engines your buyers use, no add-ons |
| Context per mention | Position, sentiment, cited source, competitors |
| Cost predictability | Flat price, no credits or per-engine charges |
| Contract flexibility | Monthly option, real trial |
| What happens next | The tool helps explain and fix a missing mention |
The last row is where the shortlist splits. Otterly, Peec, and Profound's self-serve plans are monitoring products: they tell you whether you were mentioned. Their listings don't describe published crawler logs or visitor analytics tied to conversions, so a missing mention ends in a question rather than a diagnosis.
Why Promptwatch scores highest on this sheet
Promptwatch monitors ChatGPT through the real interface rather than API sampling alone, along with Perplexity, Gemini, Claude, Copilot, and others, plus Google AI Overviews and AI Mode. Each mention comes with sentiment, competitive benchmarking, and citation analytics showing which pages and domains the answer relied on. For a business buyer, the bigger difference is what you can do about a missing mention. Agent Analytics (Professional and up) shows whether ChatGPT's crawler fetched your pages at all. Visitor analytics connect AI-referred visits to conversions. Content Agents can draft and publish the page that fills the gap.
On contract terms it's straightforward: monthly billing, annual at 12 months for the price of 10, a 7-day trial on Essential ($95/mo, 50 prompts), and a free Explore tier for a ChatGPT-only look. Professional is $245/mo for 150 prompts, two projects, two seats, and crawler logs. Business is $579/mo for 350 prompts and five seats. Promptwatch is rated 4.7/5 on G2.
Recommended buying order
Run the accuracy test on Promptwatch Essential first. If your team prefers a task queue over a report, run the same test on AthenaHQ's free tier. Bring in Scrunch if crawler-side page serving is on your roadmap. Consider Profound when the purchase is really a broader marketing-agent program with an enterprise budget. Keep Otterly or Peec for a cheap second opinion. Start at promptwatch.com.