AI Search Optimization Monitoring Platforms for LLM Visibility Optimization: Profound, Otterly, Peec (2026)

"LLM visibility optimization" is the 2026 label for a simple request: see whether ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and Perplexity mention you, then change the page that should have won. The monitoring platforms that show up in every shortlist are Profound, Otterly, and Peec. We get asked to pick one as if the subscription is the optimization.

It is not. A platform stores answers. Optimization is still an editor, a crawler fix, or a mention on someone else's comparison URL. The monitor we run for that loop is Promptwatch. If a client already has Profound, Otterly, or Peec with a real four-engine log, we will work from that export. We will not rebuild the category as a 20-row comparison table. That is a review site's job.

What the brief is actually asking

LLM visibility optimization needs, at minimum:

A frozen prompt list that sounds like buyers, not like a keyword dump.
Daily (or near-daily) answers from the UIs people use.
Mention vs citation vs "cited someone else," per engine.
A way to see if the candidate page was crawled.

Google's AI optimization guide covers eligibility for AI Overviews and AI Mode. Search Console's generative reports score Google. The other models do not file those reports. A monitoring platform is how we see them. Our GEO 2026 post is the program around that split.

Profound, Otterly, and Peec

Profound. The name procurement already wrote down. Public Starter is $99/mo billed annually, ChatGPT-only, 50 prompts. The Profound people mean when they say "enterprise GEO" is a sales conversation (Growth is $399/mo annual for a wider but still limited set; the full engine list is Enterprise). Fine if the company already signed that contract. A poor first buy if you needed four engines this month.

Otterly. Lite is $29/mo ($25 annual). That is the on-ramp price everyone quotes. The headline engine list takes add-ons ($9 to $149/mo), and the refresh is weekly-ish on the cheap tiers. Useful to prove the category exists. Awkward as the system of record for weekly optimization, because you are always looking at last week's answers.

Peec. Starter is $95/mo for 50 prompts, three models, unlimited seats. Daily data, clean UI. Extra models are $35 to $165/mo each. It stops at monitoring: no crawler log, no visitor analytics, no draft inbox. Excellent if you only wanted a tracker and already have an agency for the rest.

We name those three because the brief named them. We do not rank them with invented scores.

Why we still open Promptwatch first

Promptwatch paid plans cover ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Perplexity, plus AI Overviews and AI Mode, from real UIs, daily. Citation analytics sit at page and domain level. Agent Analytics pulls crawler logs through the CDN you already run. Visitor analytics (script or GTM) attach the sessions that do arrive. Content Agents draft into Webflow or Framer with a review inbox.

Essential is $95/mo for 50 prompts, which matches the Peec sticker without the per-model add-on math. Explore is free, ChatGPT-only, 10 prompts. Professional is $245/mo. Agency Kick-off is $199/mo with unlimited projects and prompts and 10 seats when we are running more than one brand.

That mix (answers + crawl + visits + a draft we can reject) is what we mean by a monitoring platform we can optimize from. Peec will not tell us the bot was blocked. Otterly's lag makes a Friday edit look like it "failed" until the next weekly pull. Profound Starter will not see Gemini.

The optimization half (ours)

Once the miss is in the log:

Unblock GPTBot, OAI-SearchBot, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot, GoogleOther if the crawl path is dead. OpenAI's bot docs are the reference for the OpenAI pair.
Put a dated, standalone answer under the heading that maps to the prompt.
Fix the entity name the model is searching.
Earn a real mention on the URL the fan-out already retrieves.

We re-check the same prompts. We do not ship a content sprint because twenty cells went red. Services is that backlog. The platform is the ticket source.

FAQ

Is Profound "better" than Promptwatch?

Profound's Enterprise story is bigger and more expensive, and the $99 Starter is ChatGPT-only. Better for whom? If you already have Enterprise Profound, use it. If you need four engines and crawler logs without an RFP, we start on Promptwatch.

Can we run Otterly at $29 and optimize from it?

You can prove the category. Weekly-ish data and add-on engines make it a weak weekly optimization loop. We would rather pay Essential and see yesterday's answers.

Does Peec plus our retainer equal Promptwatch?

Peec plus humans covers monitoring plus page work. You still lack crawler logs and AI-referred visitor analytics in the same project. We will work that way if you insist. We will say what is missing.

What to do this week

Write 25 buyer prompts. Use the same list on every engine.
If you already pay Profound, Otterly, or Peec, export mention vs citation and send it to us. We will not make you rip it out on day one.
If you have no log, create a Promptwatch project (Essential, or Explore for a ChatGPT-only demo).
Pick one red prompt and change one URL. Re-check in two weeks.
Email hello@1001seomedia.com if you want us on the optimization tickets. 2026 has enough platforms. The work is still the page.