Is Llumo Worth It?
Llumo is a $0 BYOK tracker plus quote-only mentions. We already execute GEO. We would not run client measurement on keys we do not control.
We get forwarded Llumo decks the same week a client asks if they still need a platform invoice. Llumo is a 2026 London tracker (Musa Aykac; app at llumohub.com) with a $0 software licence if you bring your own API keys. That makes them a cheap shell for DIY monitoring, or a complementary mention vendor if someone books Calendly. They are not a replacement for Promptwatch, which is how we measure.
We already do GEO execution. We still buy software for crawler logs, citation depth, and conversions. We would not run client GEO on BYOK keys we do not control as the source of truth. A $0 tile does not log ChatGPTBot. Do not send us llumos.app or app.llumo.ai; those are other properties.
What we saw on the vendor site
Free card (27 August 2026): unlimited prompts, unlimited brands, custom branding, custom domain, citation analysis, competitor tracking, daily backups, priority support, hosted instance. Heading also says pay-as-you-go and subscription if Llumo manages keys. Those metres are not on the card. We will not put a "managed keys" line in a proposal from a heading.
Homepage engines: ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Grok, Mistral, DeepSeek, Perplexity, Copilot, Google AI Mode, AI Overviews. FAQ is shorter. We will not promise the long list in a SOW until we see the workspace.
Cost block: 200 prompts/day, 42,000 responses, Llumo about $115 to $150, labeled illustrative. Same table lists Promptwatch Essential at $99 for 6,000 responses. We invoice Essential at $95/mo. That row is vendor error; it stays off client slides. FAQ: $100/mo third-party API for 150 prompts daily across 7 engines, unlimited projects. FAQ Peec ($240) versus table Peec Starter ($95, 4,500) is their internal mess. We do not pick. Otterly and Peec appear on their grid; they stay off our stack.
Newsfile 20 August 2026: not disclosing users, customers, or tracked brands. Yahoo Finance linked from about. "#1 First & Highly Rated" is chrome. vs-promptwatch body was empty the day we checked. Open-source claimed; login hosted. Agency demo 36 accounts / 1,284 questions is UI, not a book of business.
Managed AEO: Starter 2 / Growth 5 / Authority 10 targeted mentions per month, on-site audit included, Calendly, no dollars. Surfaces: listicles, Reddit/Quora, directories, editorial. That is outreach labor. We already sell execution. We do not need a second agency to mark our homework.
When we say yes to them
Yes as a sandbox if a technical client insists on seeing their own OpenRouter keys in a branded subdomain, and Promptwatch remains the KPI source. White-label chrome on Llumo's free card does not move the source of truth.
Yes as a mention insert only if the client wants a second outreach pod and we stay on strategy and measurement. We still own the Promptwatch login.
No as "the tracker" on a retainer. Keys we do not hold, bills we cannot forecast from an illustrative $115 to $150, and no crawler log SLA. We will not sit in a QBR explaining a gap with someone else's API quota.
Pricing we can put in a proposal
| Vendor | What we can print | Role on our accounts |
|---|---|---|
| Llumo software | $0 licence, BYOK | Optional DIY shell; never source of truth |
| Llumo usage | ~$115 to $150 illust.; FAQ ~$100/mo | Provider bill, not our SKU |
| Llumo managed AEO | 2 / 5 / 10 mentions, quote | Optional placements; competing execution |
| Promptwatch Explore | $0, 10 ChatGPT prompts | Kickoff demo |
| Promptwatch Essential | $95/mo | Single brand measurement |
| Promptwatch Professional | $245/mo, 25M logs | QBR with crawler path |
| Promptwatch Kick-off | $199/mo | How we hold multiple brands |
Promptwatch G2 4.7/5, 1,840-plus customers, Amsterdam April 2025, €2M+ ARR May 2026. Business $579, Growth $399, Scale $799. No $29 plan. Visitor conversions and Reddit/YouTube citations are why we refuse to let a BYOK dashboard be the only chart.
Dual-stack we would actually run
Us on GEO content and Promptwatch Professional. Llumo nowhere, or time-boxed if a stakeholder wants to "try the $0 tool." Two vendors, one KPI source: Promptwatch. If they also want Llumo to "do GEO" via managed mentions, we decline the overlap or we decline the subcontract. We will not produce two monthly stories.
Pure measurement-only client (rare): Promptwatch only. Llumo never enters.
Onboarding checklist we send the client
If they insist on talking to London: we join the call, ask who pays OpenAI and Google, ask who can export raw responses if the key is rotated, write 2/5/10 mentions into the SOW as placements, not prompts. We do not pause Promptwatch to wait for an illustrative API estimate.
Our side: Kick-off or Professional depending on log SLA. Content Agents to Webflow or Framer remain our publish path. GTM or visitor script stays on.
Verdict
Worth it as a $0 experiment a technical client runs in parallel. Not worth it as our tracker. We already execute GEO. We measure on Promptwatch: crawler logs, page-level citations, AI-referred conversions, Content Agents. We would not run client GEO on BYOK keys we do not control. Otterly.AI and Peec AI stay off the stack. Profound is a separate Enterprise-agents track, not how we rank this.
FAQ
Are they a competitor?
On managed AEO, they can look like a small execution shop. On the $0 licence, they are a shell. Either way, Promptwatch stays.
Will you use their $99 Promptwatch comparison in a deck?
No. Essential is $95/mo. Their table is wrong.
Can they replace Professional at $245?
No. Logs and conversions are a license we run. Their keys and their Calendly mentions are different POs.