# Profound vs Rankscale: which do AI models recommend for AI visibility, October 2026

GTM AI Recommendation Index, October 2026 Edition, AI visibility and answer engine tracking tools. Five of fourteen models named Profound first on the direct prompt; zero named Rankscale. Page: https://gtm-ai-index.com/marketing/ai-visibility-tracking/profound-vs-rankscale/

| | First-choice share | Rank | Negative rate | Labels | Models naming it |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Profound | 15% | #3 of 9 | 29% | 42 | 14 of 14 |
| Rankscale | 5% | #6 of 9 | 8% | 12 | 8 of 14 |

## The direct prompt, model by model

- Claude Haiku 4.5: profound first (first choices: Peec AI, Profound) (alternatives: HubSpot AEO Grader, Otterly)
- GPT-5.4 mini: profound first (first choices: Profound) (alternatives: Bluefish, BrightEdge AI Catalyst, Conductor, HubSpot AEO Grader, Semrush AI Visibility Toolkit, Similarweb AI Search Intelligence)
- Perplexity Sonar: profound first (first choices: Profound, Semrush AI Visibility Toolkit) (alternatives: Quattr)
- Mistral Small: profound first (first choices: Profound, SE Ranking) (alternatives: Peec AI, Qwairy)
- Muse Glimmer 30B: profound first (first choices: Peec AI, Profound) (alternatives: Qwairy, SE Ranking)
- Gemini 3.5 Flash: neither first, one named (first choices: Orchly AI) (alternatives: Ahrefs Brand Radar, GrackerAI, Peec AI, Profound, Semrush AI Visibility Toolkit)
- Grok 4.20: neither first, one named (first choices: Peec AI) (alternatives: AthenaHQ, HubSpot AEO Grader, Profound, Semrush AI Visibility Toolkit)
- GLM 4.7 FlashX: neither first, one named (first choices: Otterly) (alternatives: Rankscale, Semrush AI Visibility Toolkit)
- GPT-6 Luna: neither first, one named (first choices: Peec AI) (alternatives: Otterly, Profound)
- DeepSeek V4 Flash: neither named (first choices: HubSpot AEO Grader) (alternatives: Cognizo, Omnibound, Semrush AI Visibility Toolkit)
- Llama 4 Maverick: neither named (first choices: Peec AI) (alternatives: HubSpot AEO Grader, Qwairy, SE Ranking)
- Qwen 3.7 Flash: neither named (first choices: DeepSmith) (alternatives: Peec AI, Semrush AI Visibility Toolkit)
- Kimi K2: neither named (first choices: Peec AI) (alternatives: Otterly, Searchable)
- MiniMax M2.5: neither named (first choices: CrowdReply) (alternatives: Cognizo)

## What the models said about Profound

- "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)

## What the models said about Rankscale

- "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" (Claude Haiku 4.5, budget prompt, first choice)
- "Rankscale AI is often the best fit because it starts around $20/month" (Perplexity Sonar, budget prompt, first choice)
- "For broad, multi‑engine monitoring: Otterly.AI or Rankscale." (GLM 4.7 FlashX, comparative prompt, first choice)

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. 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.