Profound vs Peec AI vs Evertune: Which GEO Tool Wins in 2026?
A three-way breakdown of Profound, Peec AI, and Evertune on engine coverage, pricing, evidence quality, and who each platform actually fits in 2026.
Put Profound, Peec AI, and Evertune side by side and the differences show up fast: same category, same basic premise (track how AI engines talk about your brand), but different engine lists, different evidence standards, and a price range wide enough that "which one" is really "which one for your budget." Budget is usually the first filter here, Peec AI opens at $95/mo, Evertune at roughly $800+/mo, but the bigger differentiator once you dig in is what each platform does with the data after it's collected.
Bing's AI Performance report covers Copilot citations. It is not a ChatGPT prompt log.
Profound is the category's reference platform on paper, but the $99 sticker is bait, the real product lives in a sales-gated Enterprise tier. Peec AI is an excellent tracker with an earned reputation, as long as you budget for model add-ons rather than the sticker price. Evertune is the most rigorous methodology in the category, priced and packaged to be invisible below Fortune-500 budgets.
Profound vs Peec AI vs Evertune at a glance
| Profound | Peec AI | Evertune | Promptwatch | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Starting price | $99/mo (annual) | $95/mo | Custom (reported ~$800+/mo) | Free (Explore); $95/mo Essential |
| Category | Enterprise GEO platform | AI visibility tracker | Enterprise GEO platform | Full-stack AI visibility / GEO platform |
| Engine coverage | Up to 10 engines on Enterprise; Starter is ChatGPT-only, Growth covers 3 | 3 models included per tier; each extra model is a $35 to $165/mo add-on; Claude and DeepSeek are Enterprise-only | 10+ models tested via direct API access; research-grade sampling, not a live day-to-day dashboard | 10+ engines incl. ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Perplexity, Copilot, Grok; daily refresh on paid plans |
| Evidence / trust signal | Directional citation sampling; G2 reviewers report gaps versus manual ChatGPT checks | Screenshot audit trail on every measurement; G2 4.9/5 | Each prompt sampled ~100 times, 1M+ prompts per brand monthly, the most statistically rigorous methodology here | Citation analytics (page, domain, Reddit, YouTube); live AI crawler logs begin on Professional at $245/mo; 4.7/5 on G2 |
| Action layer | Agents draft and execute content actions from citation gaps | None, deliberately monitoring-only, no recommendations or execution | None, strategic reports only, no content generation or crawler logs | Content Agents plan, write, and publish GEO content to a connected CMS |
| Best for | an enterprise team with the budget and a dedicated analyst to run the deepest dataset in the category | a marketing team or agency that wants the category's cleanest tracking dashboard and will price out model add-ons before signing | an enterprise brand or insights team that needs statistically defensible AI perception data and has the budget for it | a team that wants prompt tracking, citation analytics, crawler logs, and automated content in one platform |
Where Profound wins
Profound's case rests on unmatched engine depth (up to 10 on Enterprise, including Grok, Meta AI, and DeepSeek), a unique Prompt Volumes query-demand dataset, and Agents that turn findings into drafted content. G2 4.6/5, Winter 2026 category leader, $1B valuation after a Feb 2026 Series C. The trade-off: everything it's actually known for sits behind an unpublished Enterprise price reportedly running $2,000 to $5,000+/mo, and setup realistically takes one to three months.
Where Peec AI wins
Peec AI's case rests on the most polished tracking UX in the category, a screenshot-backed audit trail on every data point, unlimited seats, and daily refreshes that agencies build client reporting around. $10M ARR in about 16 months, $29M raised, and a 4.9/5 average on G2. The trade-off: the sticker price only covers 3 models per tier, so realistic coverage runs 30 to 50% above list, and there's no historical backfill or action layer.
Where Evertune wins
Evertune's case rests on boardroom-grade rigor, each prompt sampled roughly 100 times across 10+ models, with confidence intervals a research team can actually defend, plus a Trade Desk activation pipeline no rival offers. Founded by Trade Desk veterans with about $19M raised, though public reviews are genuinely sparse. The trade-off: pricing is opaque by design, onboarding runs weeks like a consulting engagement, and almost no independent reviews exist to check the claims against.
Action layer: who does something with the data?
Profound is the only one of the three that acts on the data, via Agents that draft and execute content. Peec AI and Evertune stay deliberately monitoring-only. If someone on your team is ready to act on findings without a separate tool, weight that over raw tracking depth.
Pricing: sticker price vs configured price
Sticker prices rarely survive contact with a real configuration. Profound: $99/mo Starter (ChatGPT only, 50 prompts), $399/mo Growth (3 engines, 100 prompts), Enterprise custom (reportedly $2,000 to $5,000+/mo) for the full 10-engine, Prompt Volumes, Agents stack. Peec AI: $95/mo Starter (50 prompts, 3 models only, extra models cost $35 to $165/mo each), Agency from $245/mo, Enterprise custom for Claude/DeepSeek. Evertune: No self-serve pricing; third-party sources cite a Pro plan around $800/mo and enterprise floors near $3,000+/mo, both unconfirmed without a sales cycle. Price your actual engine list, prompt volume, and seat count against each of these before treating any single number as the real cost of ownership.
Who should pick which
- Pick Profound if you're an enterprise team with the budget and a dedicated analyst to run the deepest dataset in the category.
- Pick Peec AI if you're a marketing team or agency that wants the category's cleanest tracking dashboard and will price out model add-ons before signing.
- Pick Evertune if you're an enterprise brand or insights team that needs statistically defensible AI perception data and has the budget for it.
FAQ
Which of the three is cheapest for a small team?
Peec AI has the lowest entry price at $95/mo, and that tier includes 50 prompts, 3 models, 1 project, unlimited seats. Evertune's roughly $800+/mo entry point buys considerably more out of the gate, so "cheapest" and "best value" aren't always the same tool.
Which one has the most trustworthy data?
Peec AI has the strongest independent review signal of the three: $10M ARR in about 16 months, $29M raised, and a 4.9/5 average on G2. Profound: G2 4.6/5, Winter 2026 category leader, $1B valuation after a Feb 2026 Series C. Evertune: Founded by Trade Desk veterans with about $19M raised, though public reviews are genuinely sparse. Treat every AI-tracking vendor's accuracy claims as directional rather than exact, and cross-check a sample of results manually before reporting them upward.
Do any of these three help me fix visibility gaps, or just report them?
Profound (via Agents that draft and execute content) does; Peec AI and Evertune don't, they're deliberately monitoring-only.
Do I need all three, or should I pick one?
Running two overlapping trackers rarely earns its keep, pick the one whose category (tracking-only, action-oriented, or research-grade) matches how your team actually works, and revisit the others only if that gap becomes obvious. See how we rank for the criteria we weigh across every platform in this category.