# Profound vs HubSpot AEO Grader: which do AI models recommend for AI visibility, September 2026

GTM AI Recommendation Index, September 2026 Edition, AI visibility and answer engine tracking tools. Zero of twelve models named Profound first on the direct prompt; one named HubSpot AEO Grader. Page: https://gtm-ai-index.com/marketing/ai-visibility-tracking/profound-vs-hubspot-aeo-grader/

| | First-choice share | Rank | Negative rate | Labels | Models naming it |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Profound | 10% | #2 of 11 | 22% | 37 | 12 of 12 |
| HubSpot AEO Grader | 4% | #7 of 11 | 11% | 18 | 9 of 12 |

## The direct prompt, model by model

- Gemini 3.5 Flash: hubspot aeo grader first (first choices: HubSpot AEO Grader) (alternatives: LLM Pulse, Mentionova, Otterly, Profound)
- Perplexity Sonar: neither first, one named (first choices: Wellows) (alternatives: Goodie, Otterly, Peec AI, Profound)
- Mistral Small: neither first, one named (first choices: Peec AI) (alternatives: AthenaHQ, Otterly, Profound, Semrush AI Visibility Toolkit)
- GLM 4.7 FlashX: neither first, one named (first choices: Semrush AI Visibility Toolkit) (alternatives: Ahrefs Brand Radar, Otterly, Profound)
- MiniMax M2.5: neither first, one named (first choices: Wellows) (alternatives: Mentionova, Profound)
- Claude Haiku 4.5: neither named (first choices: Wellows) (alternatives: Ahrefs Brand Radar, GrackerAI, Otterly)
- GPT-5.4 mini: neither named (first choices: Athena) (alternatives: Semrush Enterprise / Enterprise AIO)
- Grok 4.1 Fast: neither named (first choices: Peec AI) (alternatives: Otterly)
- DeepSeek V4 Flash: neither named (first choices: Peec AI) (alternatives: Mentionova, Otterly, Wellows)
- Llama 4 Maverick: neither named
- Qwen 3.7 Flash: neither named (first choices: Omnibound) (alternatives: Peec AI, SE Ranking)
- Kimi K2: neither named (first choices: Scrunch) (alternatives: AIVO Platform, Goodie, Peec AI, Semrush AI Visibility Toolkit)

## What the models said about Profound

- "Price issue: $499/month for Lite plan is 48% more expensive than the category average... G2 reviews cite instability, slowness, and overwhelming dashboards" (Kimi K2, negative prompt, hard negative)
- "Profound: Major red flags—allegations of using browser extension clickstream data ... experts call it ethically questionable" (Grok 4.1 Fast, negative prompt, hard negative)
- "Avoid enterprise tools like Profound ($499+/month)" (Qwen 3.7 Flash, budget prompt, hard negative)
- "Shortlist 3-5: Profound (enterprise security), AirOps (tracking-to-content loop), Semrush/Ahrefs (if you use SEO tools)." (Grok 4.1 Fast, scale prompt, first choice)
- "Enterprise-grade with data depth and competitive intelligence | Large enterprises needing comprehensive tracking" (GLM 4.7 FlashX, comparative prompt, first choice)
- ""We're an enterprise—we need every possible engine covered." → Profound or Peec AI" (Qwen 3.7 Flash, comparative prompt, first choice)

## What the models said about HubSpot AEO Grader

- "it currently holds very few independent reviews (approx. 2 verified reviews on major platforms like G2 as of mid-2026)" (Qwen 3.7 Flash, negative prompt, soft negative)
- "though its coverage is narrower than some alternatives" (GPT-5.4 mini, direct prompt, soft negative)
- "If you already use HubSpot: Go with HubSpot AEO. At $50/mo, it allows your current marketing team to act on AI visibility gaps immediately" (Gemini 3.5 Flash, direct prompt, first choice)
- "Choose HubSpot AEO if budget is the main constraint" (GPT-5.4 mini, budget prompt, first choice)
- "Free Alternatives Before You Pay - HubSpot AEO Grader — one-time snapshot of how AI describes your brand" (Kimi K2, negative prompt, alternative)

Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all twelve models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category. Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category. Published under CC BY 4.0; the output is the models' output, and nothing here is a recommendation by the index.