AI visibility and answer engine tracking tools · October 2026 Edition
Otterly vs Profound
One of fourteen models named Otterly first on the direct prompt; five named Profound. Otterly was named by thirteen of the fourteen models and Profound by fourteen and Otterly carries 36 labels and Profound 42, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in one category this edition.
Named in two categories this edition.
First-choice share20%15%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate6%29%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#1#3A position in a field of 9; printed, not drawn.
Labels3642A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Otterly reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Peec AI was named alongside these two in nine of the fourteen direct answers. Otterly vs Peec AI · Otterly vs HubSpot AEO Grader · Otterly vs Semrush AI Visibility Toolkit
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the AI visibility and answer engine tracking tools page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
OtterlyFirst choices, of fourteen modelsProfound
Direct151 against Profound
Paraphrase113 against Profound
Comparative26
Budget-constrained902 against Profound
Scale-constrained02
Negative002 against Otterly · 6 against Profound
Bars are first choices, 0 to 14 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to fourteen.
Across every category in the October 2026 Edition, Otterly and Profound were named in the same answer fifty times, of the 103 answers naming Otterly and the 126 naming Profound. In those answers Profound took the first choice thirteen times and Otterly nine.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Otterly and Profound stood in it.
| Model | Direct | Paraphrase | Comparative | Budget-constrained | Scale-constrained | Negative |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | | | | | | |
| GPT-5.4 mini | | | | | ||
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | | | | | | |
| Perplexity Sonar | | | | |||
| Grok 4.20 | | | | | | |
| Mistral Small | | | ||||
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | | | | | ||
| Llama 4 Maverick | ||||||
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | | |||||
| Kimi K2 | | | | | | |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | | | | | ||
| MiniMax M2.5 | | | | |||
| GPT-6 Luna | | | | |||
| Muse Glimmer 30B | | | | |
Otterly Profound first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Otterly on the left and Profound on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Otterly and Profound stood in it.
Otterly first, Profound not the choice
1 of 14 modelsProfound was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.GLM 4.7 FlashXOtterly alternatives: Rankscale, Semrush AI Visibility Toolkit
Profound first, Otterly an alternative
5 of 14 modelsOtterly was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Claude Haiku 4.5Peec AI, Profound alternatives: HubSpot AEO Grader, Otterly
GPT-5.4 miniProfound alternatives: Bluefish, BrightEdge AI Catalyst, Conductor, HubSpot AEO Grader, Semrush AI Visibility Toolkit, Similarweb AI Search Intelligence
Perplexity SonarProfound, Semrush AI Visibility Toolkit alternatives: Quattr
Mistral SmallProfound, SE Ranking alternatives: Peec AI, Qwairy
Muse Glimmer 30BPeec AI, Profound alternatives: Qwairy, SE Ranking
Neither was the first choice, one was named
4 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.Gemini 3.5 FlashOrchly AI alternatives: Ahrefs Brand Radar, GrackerAI, Peec AI, Profound, Semrush AI Visibility Toolkit
Grok 4.20Peec AI alternatives: AthenaHQ, HubSpot AEO Grader, Profound, Semrush AI Visibility Toolkit
Kimi K2Peec AI alternatives: Otterly, Searchable
GPT-6 LunaPeec AI alternatives: Otterly, Profound
Neither was named
4 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.DeepSeek V4 FlashHubSpot AEO Grader alternatives: Cognizo, Omnibound, Semrush AI Visibility Toolkit
Llama 4 MaverickPeec AI alternatives: HubSpot AEO Grader, Qwairy, SE Ranking
Qwen 3.7 FlashDeepSmith alternatives: Peec AI, Semrush AI Visibility Toolkit
MiniMax M2.5CrowdReply alternatives: Cognizo
Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.
By buyer segment
The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
Otterly leads by twenty-nine points.
Otterly31%#1 of 7Profound2%#7 of 7Mid-marketThe figures above
Enterprise
The order flips: Profound leads at enterprise.
Profound55%#1 of 9Otterly0%#9 of 9What the models said about Otterly
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Five of six in this category shown.
“OtterlyAI (~$29-49/month) The concern: "A mirror, not a GPS"... weak actionable recommendations” Kimi K2 · negative prompt · soft negative
“General Red Flags Across Many Tools (e.g., Otterly.ai, Peec AI, Scrunch, Geneo, Rankscale):” Grok 4.20 · negative prompt · soft negative
“Otterly AI at $29/month or Rankscale AI at $20/month offer the best value, with Otterly AI being particularly attractive due to its quick implementation” Claude Haiku 4.5 · budget prompt · first choice
“Otterly AI at $29/mo is the practical minimum viable option for daily, multi-engine AI visibility tracking” Muse Glimmer 30B · budget prompt · first choice
“the best AI visibility and answer engine tracking tool for a mid-market B2B company is Otterly.AI” GLM 4.7 FlashX · direct prompt · first choice
What the models said about Profound
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“Tools to Approach with Extra Caution or Avoid (if possible): - Profound: Privacy concerns” Grok 4.20 · negative prompt · hard negative
“What to Avoid - Profound ($399+/mo) – Overkill unless you're enterprise” Kimi K2 · paraphrase prompt · hard negative
“Avoid pricier ones like Profound ($99+)” Grok 4.20 · budget prompt · hard negative
“A purpose-built Answer Engine Optimization platform that combines the industry's deepest AI visibility data with content creation, automated workflows, agent analytics, and real-time attribution.” Muse Glimmer 30B · comparative prompt · first choice
“Peec AI or Profound are most likely to deliver the right balance of features, analytics depth, and team-focused pricing.” Claude Haiku 4.5 · direct prompt · first choice
“the best single pick is usually Profound if your priority is AI visibility / answer-engine tracking specifically” GPT-5.4 mini · direct prompt · first choice
Also compared
Otterly vs Peec AIOtterly vs HubSpot AEO GraderOtterly vs Semrush AI Visibility ToolkitOtterly vs RankscaleOtterly vs SE RankingOtterly vs ScrunchPeec AI vs ProfoundProfound vs HubSpot AEO GraderProfound vs Semrush AI Visibility ToolkitProfound vs RankscaleProfound vs SE RankingProfound vs ScrunchAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full AI visibility standing
Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.