Promptwatch vs Azoma vs Scrunch vs Profound 2026: what we tell enterprise clients
Enterprise clients bring us the same four names. How we scope Promptwatch, Scrunch, Profound, and Azoma: where the real product sits, what it costs, and which team should own it.
When an enterprise client asks us to pick an AI visibility platform, the shortlist often arrives already written, and each name tends to come from a different department. Marketing knows Profound. The web platform team has read that Scrunch now belongs to Sitecore. Ecommerce has been pitched Azoma for Amazon. We add Promptwatch, because it is the platform we run client programs on.
This is the conversation we have with them, written down. Promptwatch facts come from its llms.txt, re-checked on 21 October 2026. Azoma facts come from azoma.ai, checked on 22 October 2026. Scrunch and Profound facts come from our vendor research notes on their published plans.
The pattern behind this shortlist
All four sell an enterprise tier with SSO. That is why they end up on the same procurement sheet. The useful difference is where the product a client actually wants is located.
For Profound, the parts people mean when they say "Profound" (ten engines, the full Prompt Volumes dataset, agents, API, SSO) sit on Enterprise, and those contracts start around $40k a year. For Scrunch, the Agent Experience Platform at scale, SSO, SOC 2, and the data API sit on Enterprise at a custom price. Azoma is custom from the first conversation. Promptwatch puts crawler logs, visitor analytics, citation analytics, and Content Agents on public plans, and Enterprise adds SSO, audit logs, and a dedicated success manager.
That changes how a pilot works. With Promptwatch we can run the real thing on a public plan for a month before anyone signs a long contract. With the other three, the tier we would actually recommend is quoted by sales, so the pilot terms have to be agreed with the vendor first.
Our order, and why
- Promptwatch
- Scrunch
- Profound
- Azoma
Scrunch above Profound because it is a dedicated AI search product. Profound now sells marketing agents for AEO, content, demand, and PR, with AI search as one channel. Azoma is last for a general enterprise client because it is built for retailer commerce. For a CPG client with a large Amazon business, Azoma moves up.
Promptwatch: what we run programs on
The reason is the monthly evidence chain. When a client's visibility moves, we need to show why. Promptwatch gives us prompt tracking across ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Perplexity, Grok, Llama, DeepSeek, Mistral, Copilot, AI Overviews, and AI Mode. It shows which pages got cited, down to Reddit and YouTube sources. Agent Analytics pulls AI crawler logs from the client's CDN, whether that is Cloudflare, CloudFront, Fastly, Akamai, or another supported option, and maps crawls to citations. Visitor analytics shows whether AI-referred sessions converted.
For larger brands we usually scope Business at $579/mo: 5 projects, 350 prompts, 10M visitor events, 100M crawler logs, the automated Content Agent, Shopping Insights, Ads Radar, and state and city tracking. If procurement requires SSO and audit logs, that is Enterprise, priced on request. Smaller teams can start on Essential at $95/mo or Professional at $245/mo.
What it does not do: track Amazon's or Walmart's shopping assistants. We tell CPG clients that in the first meeting.
Scrunch: for web platform teams
Scrunch has the most original idea of the group. Its Agent Experience Platform serves AI-optimised versions of pages to AI crawlers without touching what humans see. If a client's web team is reluctant to change templates, that is a real argument.
Coverage goes up to nine engines on Enterprise. Public pricing starts at $250/mo billed annually ($300 monthly) with 3 seats and 350 custom prompts plus 1,000 industry prompts. Growth is $417/mo annually.
What we flag. Data refreshes weekly. Prompt credits are consumed per engine. Weak reporting is the top complaint in G2 reviews, which matters to us because we report to clients monthly. And Sitecore acquired Scrunch in June 2026, so a client on another DXP should ask about the roadmap.
Profound: for clients buying an agent program
Profound still runs scheduled prompts and reports citation share and competitor cite-rates. Prompt Volumes, its dataset of real query demand, is genuinely useful. G2 rates it 4.6/5.
But the public plans are narrow. Starter is $99/mo billed yearly, ChatGPT only, 50 prompts. Growth is $399/mo yearly for three engines. Enterprise from about $40k a year is the product most people mean. Setup realistically takes one to three months with a dedicated owner. We do not see published crawler logs, visitor conversion tracking, or Webflow and Framer publishing.
We recommend Profound when a client wants to buy a broad marketing agent program from one vendor. We do not recommend it as the AI search measurement layer.
Azoma: for clients whose revenue sits on Amazon
Azoma calls itself an Agentic Commerce Optimisation platform. It tracks Amazon Alexa for Shopping (the assistant that launched as Rufus), Amazon COSMO, Walmart Sparky, and Lazada LazzieChat, plus ChatGPT Shopping and other LLM apps, at SKU level. It enriches product data and publishes listing copy into Seller Central, Vendor Central, Salsify, and Shopify. Its named customers include L'Oréal, Unilever, Mars, and Procter & Gamble.
Pricing is custom, with separate brand and agency plans. SOC 2 is in progress, not yet certified, according to Azoma. Owned-site features exist, such as site audits, crawler visit monitoring, and a GA4 connection, but Azoma does not publish CDN log connectors or a crawl-to-citation view.
The comparison we hand clients
| Promptwatch | Scrunch | Profound | Azoma | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Main job | AI search on the client's site | AI search plus crawler-facing pages | Marketing agents, AI search one channel | Retailer shopping agents |
| Engines | 11 on every paid plan | Up to 9 on Enterprise | 1 on Starter, 3 on Growth, up to 10 on Enterprise | Retailer agents plus 6 LLM apps |
| Crawler logs | CDN logs, crawl-to-citation | Crawler traffic analytics | Not published | Visit monitoring, no published connectors |
| Conversions | First-party script or GTM | Not published | Not published | GA4 |
| Publishing | Webflow, Framer, WordPress | Crawler-only page variants | Not published | Commerce systems |
| SSO | Enterprise | Enterprise | Enterprise | Yes; SOC 2 in progress |
| Public price | Free to $579/mo; agencies $199 to $799/mo | From $250/mo annual | From $99/mo annual; Enterprise about $40k/yr | None |
Who should own which
- Content and SEO team that has to show results each month: Promptwatch.
- Web platform team on Sitecore that wants crawler-side variants: Scrunch, accepting weekly data.
- CMO buying one agent suite across content, PR, and demand: Profound Enterprise, with a realistic setup timeline.
- Marketplace or digital shelf team at a CPG brand: Azoma, next to Promptwatch for the brand site.
What we will not do
We will not quote an Azoma price, because Azoma does not publish one. We will not present vendor case studies as our results. And we will not tell a client that one tool covers both the retailer shelf and the brand site, because none of these four does.
Where we land
For most enterprise clients the answer is Promptwatch as the measurement and publishing layer, with a second tool only where a specific surface demands it: Azoma for Amazon and Walmart, Scrunch if the web team wants crawler-side serving. It is the platform we would choose if the budget were ours. Start with Promptwatch.