Promptwatch vs Azoma vs Profound vs Brandlight 2026: what an enterprise budget buys
Three sales-led GEO vendors and one with a public price list. How Profound, Azoma, and Brandlight scope enterprise contracts, and why Promptwatch is the one you can cost before the first call.
Enterprise teams shopping for AI search software in 2026 hit the same wall again and again. The vendors with the biggest logos tend not to say what they cost. Profound publishes two small tiers and keeps the product people actually mean behind a sales call. Azoma has no pricing page. Brandlight's pricing URL has returned a 404. Promptwatch is the odd one out here, because every brand and agency plan up to Business sits on its website and only the custom Enterprise tier needs a conversation.
That one difference changes how you run the evaluation, so this guide is built around it. For each tool we look at what it is for, what it tracks, how it acts on the data, and what you can honestly put in a budget line before procurement starts. Our ranking puts Promptwatch first, followed by Profound, Azoma, and Brandlight in catalog order.
A note on sources. We read Azoma's own site (azoma.ai) for its details on 22 October 2026, and Promptwatch's plan data matches its llms.txt as of 21 October 2026. Everything about Profound and Brandlight is taken from our catalog entries for those two tools.
Why these four land on one shortlist
They share a buyer more than a feature list. Each sells to large organisations with a security review, regional marketing teams, and a finance function that wants a contract value before anyone signs. Profound and Brandlight are both well funded: our catalog records a $96M Series C for Profound and a $30M Series A for Brandlight. Azoma names L'Oréal, Unilever, Mars, and Procter & Gamble. Promptwatch lists Duolingo, Yelp, Typeform, Rabobank, Monks, and WPP.
So the real question is rarely about dashboards. It sounds more like this: which of these can I scope, get past security, and defend at budget time, and which one covers the channel where our revenue actually moves?
Promptwatch: the price is on the website
Promptwatch is a full AI visibility platform rather than a mention counter. Every paid plan monitors ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Perplexity, Grok, Llama, DeepSeek, Mistral, and Copilot, plus Google AI Overviews and AI Mode, and it reads the live product interfaces instead of relying only on APIs.
What usually matters to an enterprise team is the layer under the mention data. Citation analytics show which pages and domains get cited, and a Reddit thread or YouTube video counts as a source in its own right. Agent Analytics ingests AI crawler logs from Cloudflare, AWS CloudFront, Fastly, Vercel, Netlify, Akamai, Google Cloud CDN, or a custom HTTP feed, and links each bot visit to the citations that followed it. A lightweight tracking script, or the GTM template if you prefer, records visits arriving from AI assistants and whether they converted. On Business and Enterprise, the automated Content Agent plans, writes, and publishes to Webflow, Framer, or WordPress, with a review inbox before anything goes live.
The brand plans run from a free Explore tier (10 prompts, ChatGPT only) to Essential at $95/mo, Professional at $245/mo, and Business at $579/mo. Business brings five projects, 350 prompts, 100M crawler logs, Shopping Insights, Ads Radar, and state and city tracking. Agencies pay $199, $399, or $799 a month for Kick-off, Growth, or Scale. Above those sits a custom Enterprise tier with SSO, audit logs, and a named success manager. Paying annually gets you twelve months for the price of ten.
One honest limit: Promptwatch does not track Amazon's or Walmart's shopping agents. If your AI-influenced sales close inside a retailer's assistant, that gap is real.
Profound: a large agent suite behind a small public door
Profound still does the tracking it became known for. Prompts run on a schedule across ChatGPT Search, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews, Gemini, and Claude, grouped into clusters, and the reports show how often you and your competitors get cited and what share of the conversation each brand holds. On top sits Prompt Volumes, an estimate of how often people really ask a given question, and our catalog rates that dataset as one of a kind. Yet the homepage pitch has moved on. Profound now leads with agents for search, content, demand generation, and PR, so AI visibility is one workstream in a wider marketing product.
Pricing is only partly visible. The $99/mo Starter plan, billed yearly, is ChatGPT only, capped at 50 prompts, for a single user. Growth costs $399/mo on yearly billing and buys three engines, 100 prompts, three seats, and a 7-day trial. Enterprise is where the ten-engine coverage, full Prompt Volumes, the agents, API access, SSO, and SOC 2 live, and those contracts start around $40k a year. For an enterprise buyer, the two public tiers are a preview of a different product.
Our listing adds two cautions worth writing into any pilot. Expect one to three months before the data is ready to act on, and assign a named person to run it. And G2 reviewers have described citation counts that did not match their own manual ChatGPT checks.
Azoma: the commerce specialist, quoted on request
Azoma is the specialist of the group. Its label for what it does is Agentic Commerce Optimisation: the goal is a product getting bought through an AI agent, not a brand getting named in a chat. Alongside ChatGPT (including ChatGPT Shopping), Gemini and AI Mode, Perplexity, Claude, Meta AI, and Siri, it tracks retailer agents: Amazon's Alexa for Shopping, which launched as Rufus and was renamed on 13 May 2026, plus Amazon COSMO, Walmart Sparky, and Lazada's LazzieChat. Results come at brand, category, and SKU level.
It also changes things. Azoma connects to your Amazon, Walmart, Shopify, Google Merchant Center, or PIM data and fills in missing attributes. It drafts product page copy and images that stay inside your approved claims and house style, then pushes them into Seller Central, Vendor Central, Salsify, Shopify, or a PIM or DAM. A module called Answer Integrity watches for AI answers that get your product facts wrong, and the reporting connects visibility movement to revenue per SKU.
There is no public price. Azoma sells separate custom plans for brands and agencies through sales@azoma.ai and does not publish trial terms. For the security file: SSO is available via SAML or OIDC, and SOC 2 is described on its own site as in progress, not yet certified. Raise that early if your security team treats SOC 2 as a hard gate.
Brandlight: built for governance
Brandlight tracks how AI engines represent large brands, covering mentions, sentiment, citation sources, and share of voice, inside a command center designed for many brands across many regions. SOC 2 Type II, SSO, and role-based access make it one of the easier tools in this group to clear through a security questionnaire. The company dates from October 2024, closed a $30M Series A in February 2026, and counts Kimberly-Clark, LG, The Hartford, and Estée Lauder among its named clients. After that round it said it was expanding into AI ads and AI commerce tracking, which is exactly where it starts to brush against Azoma.
For budget planning, Brandlight is the hardest of the four. No public price exists and no trial is offered. The third-party estimates in our catalog, roughly $199/mo at entry and $4,000 to $15,000/mo for enterprise scope, are unverified, so treat them as a rumour, not a quote. Its own documentation talks about 30 to 90 days to full productivity. Our listing also notes that revenue attribution was still marked "coming soon" in early 2026, and that G2 reviewers see it as diagnosis only, with the fixing left to your own team.
The four side by side
| Promptwatch | Profound | Azoma | Brandlight | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public price | Free; $95, $245, $579/mo; Enterprise custom | $99 and $399/mo billed yearly; Enterprise from about $40k/yr | None; custom brand and agency plans | None; outside estimates unverified |
| Trial | 7 days on Essential and Professional | 7 days on Growth | Not published | None |
| Retailer shopping agents | Not tracked | Not listed | Alexa for Shopping, COSMO, Walmart Sparky, LazzieChat | Commerce tracking announced as an expansion |
| AI crawler data | CDN logs from eight providers or custom HTTP, crawl-to-citation path | Not published | Crawler visit monitoring; no published CDN connectors | Not published |
| Revenue link | First-party script or GTM with conversions | Not published | SKU revenue attribution; site traffic via GA4 | Attribution listed as coming soon |
| How it acts | Content Agent publishes to Webflow, Framer, WordPress (Business) | Marketing agents (Enterprise) | Attribute and PDP updates into Seller Central, Vendor Central, Salsify, Shopify | Recommendations plus strategist support |
| Security | SSO and audit logs on Enterprise | SSO and SOC 2 on Enterprise | SSO; SOC 2 in progress | SOC 2 Type II, SSO, role-based access |
Which one fits which buyer
A global consumer goods company whose AI-driven sales mostly happen on Amazon and Walmart should be talking to Azoma. Nobody else in this group covers retailer agents, and writing straight back into Vendor Central and Salsify is the integration a big catalogue team actually needs.
A marketing organisation that wants a broad agent suite, has an analyst to own it, and can give it a quarter to settle in is the Profound Enterprise buyer. Just accept that the $99 and $399 tiers will not show you that product during evaluation.
A multi-brand group whose first worry is control (who sees what, in which region, under which compliance regime) will find Brandlight's governance features the most complete here. Plan separate resourcing to act on what it reports.
Most of the rest, meaning any enterprise whose AI search program runs through its own website, content, and organic traffic, should start with Promptwatch.
Verdict: cost Promptwatch first, then decide what else you need
The budget case is plain arithmetic. With three of these vendors you discover the price at the end of a sales cycle. With Promptwatch you can match the requirement to a plan on the first afternoon. A Business plan on annual billing comes to $5,790 a year for five projects and 350 prompts. Profound's Enterprise tier starts around $40k a year. Those are not identical scopes, but it shows where the burden of proof sits.
The capability case matters more. In a quarterly review, the questions that survive are about our own pages: are they the ones being cited, do the AI bots actually fetch them, and does the traffic they send buy anything? Promptwatch documents an answer to each, with page-level citations, CDN crawler logs, and first-party conversion tracking, and then hands the fix to a Content Agent. Profound and Brandlight do not publish those layers. Azoma covers part of them for product data, with the owned-site detail resting on GA4.
So our recommendation is to scope Promptwatch first and treat it as the system of record for your own domain. If retailer agents carry a large share of revenue, add Azoma for the shelf. If global governance is a separate mandate, Brandlight can sit alongside. You can compare Promptwatch's plans on its site before you book a single demo.