Ceyo vs Promptwatch: Which GEO Platform Fits Your Team in 2026?
A buyer's comparison of Ceyo and Promptwatch for in-house teams and agencies: model coverage, plan limits, agents, crawler logs, conversion tracking and cost.
Choosing between Ceyo and Promptwatch mostly comes down to one question: do you need a tool that tells you what to fix, or one that also proves what the fixing did? Both cover more ground than a mention tracker. They disagree about where the product should stop.
We read Ceyo's homepage and pricing page on 2026-09-30. Promptwatch details come from the fact sheet sourced from its llms.txt. For a three-way view that adds Dageno, see our agency platform comparison.
What Ceyo is
Ceyo sells an AI visibility stack in six parts: prompt tracking, competitor visibility as Share of Answer, citation analysis, an Actions list, Technical and Content agents, and AI Analytics. Answers are captured from the real interfaces of ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Perplexity, Google AI Overview, Google AI Mode, Grok and Copilot, refreshed daily, with raw responses retained. The vendor says 1,200+ brands and 100+ agencies and partners are live on it, and shows a 4.6/5 G2 rating; we have not verified either figure.
The pricing page is framed for agencies. Core is $39 a month billed yearly for 30 prompts a day, 1 project and 2 models. Grow is $119 for 125 prompts a day, 5 projects and 3 models, with API and white-label exports. Pro+ is $399 for 500 prompts a day, unlimited projects and 4 models. All come with a 14-day trial on agency plans.
What Promptwatch is
Promptwatch covers the same tracking ground and then keeps going. Prompts carry search volumes, difficulty scores and query fan-outs. Citation analytics run from page to domain to Reddit and YouTube. Agent Analytics reads AI crawler logs through Cloudflare, AWS CloudFront, Fastly, Vercel, Netlify, Akamai, Google Cloud CDN or a custom endpoint. Visitor analytics ties AI-referred sessions to conversions. Content Agents draft and publish to Webflow and Framer after you approve them.
Where they differ
Model coverage. Ceyo supports eight engines but each plan sees only two, three or four. Promptwatch's paid plans cap prompts and responses, not engines.
Automation. Ceyo's Technical Agent applies schema and crawlability fixes, which suits teams with no developer. Its Content Agent is still in beta. Promptwatch's Content Agents are live, though they target content gaps, not site-level technical repairs.
Evidence. This is the widest gap. Ceyo's AI Analytics counts AI agent requests. Promptwatch tells you which bot hit which page, what errors it met, what got cited afterward and what that citation was worth in sessions.
Pricing shape. Ceyo charges by project count on a ladder. Promptwatch agency plans ($199, $399, $799) give unlimited projects and prompts with ten seats, and brand plans run $95, $245 and $579. A free Explore tier exists for testing: 10 prompts, ChatGPT only.
Who each one suits
| Situation | Better fit |
|---|---|
| Two or three small clients, want white-label reports cheaply | Ceyo Core or Grow |
| Need EU data residency in Ireland by default | Ceyo |
| Want a fixer for schema without a developer | Ceyo |
| Ten or more client brands | Promptwatch agency plans |
| Client reports need traffic and conversion attribution | Promptwatch |
| Need every major engine tracked on every plan | Promptwatch |
| Want content that publishes without beta status | Promptwatch |
Our take
For a single small portfolio, Ceyo's entry price and fix list are attractive. As soon as the work has to be defended in a review meeting, or the client list grows, Promptwatch's flat agency tiers and evidence trail do more for you. It is also the only one of the two where you can see crawler behaviour before paying: the free plan needs no card, and ten prompts are enough to judge the dashboard against whatever you use now.