Otterly AI vs Peec AI: $29 against $95, and what the gap buys

These are the two self-serve platforms in AI visibility tracking, the category also sold as GEO or AEO: measuring how often, and how favorably, ChatGPT and the other assistants mention your brand when someone asks a question a search engine used to answer. Both publish their prices, which already separates them from most of the category. Both charge by tracked prompts rather than by seat, and both give you unlimited team members.

The headline gap is three to one. It closes almost completely once you divide by what you are actually buying, and then reopens in a place most comparisons never look: the engines each one covers, and what the missing ones cost to add.

Pricing, side by side

Monthly billing, checked against each vendor's own pricing page in September 2026. Peec shows prices by region: US dollars above, euros to visitors in the EU, where annual billing takes Starter from EUR 85 to EUR 70 a month. Both vendors advertise "15% off" for annual billing; on Peec's euro prices the real discount runs from about 12% on Pro to about 18% on Starter, so check the figure on your own plan rather than the claim.

What you are actually buying per prompt

A tracked prompt is one question run against the engines on a schedule. Both tools run daily on every plan, so a month is roughly 30 runs. Peec publishes the resulting number of AI answers for its own plans, 4,500 on Starter and 13,500 on Pro, which is simply prompts times models times 30. Applying the same arithmetic to Otterly's plans puts the two on one scale.

Answer counts assume daily tracking of every prompt on every engine included in the plan, which is the method Peec uses for its own published figures. Cents per answer are rounded. Prompt counts and prices are the vendors' own.

Per tracked prompt the entry plans are within three cents of each other, $1.93 on Otterly Lite against $1.90 on Peec Starter. Otterly is cheaper per AI answer at every tier, because it runs four engines against Peec's three for the same prompt. That is arithmetic, not a verdict: four engines you did not choose are worth less than three you did.

The engine list is the real decision

Otterly covers ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, Perplexity and Microsoft Copilot on every plan, including the $29 one. Claude, Google AI Mode and Gemini are paid add-ons, listed from $29, $9 and $9 a month respectively on Lite.

Peec lets you pick three models on self-serve plans from ChatGPT, Google AI Mode, Google AI Overviews, Microsoft Copilot, Gemini and Naver AI. Perplexity and Claude are not on that menu: they sit on Enterprise, where up to 13 models are available and the price comes from a sales conversation.

• If Perplexity matters to you, Otterly Lite covers it for $29 and Peec's self-serve plans do not cover it at all. For a brand in a research-heavy category, that single line decides the comparison.
• If Gemini and Google AI Mode matter, Peec includes them in your choice of three. On Otterly they are $9 each on top, so a realistic Lite setup with both is $47 a month for 15 prompts across six engines.
• If you want every engine, neither self-serve tier does it. Peec Enterprise goes furthest at up to 13 models.

Peec's pricing FAQ also states that countries and languages cost nothing extra, since the price is tied to prompts and models. Otterly lists multi-country support on all plans too. Geography is not a differentiator here, whatever the plan cards imply.

Where the extra $66 goes

If the prompt volume is not the reason to pay more, the analysis is. Peec Starter includes work Otterly does not sell at any tier.

Both also report on AI crawlers and AI-referred traffic. Otterly calls it Agent Analytics and caps it by events per month, 200,000 on Standard; Peec caps bot visits analyzed per plan, four million on Starter.

Choose Otterly AI if…

• Your budget for this is double digits, not triple.
• Perplexity is part of how your buyers research.
• You track a handful of high-value prompts rather than a broad set.
• You run several brands or clients and do not want a per-project plan limit.
• You want API or MCP access on the tracker at Standard price and above, and do not need it on the cheapest plan.

Choose Peec AI if…

• Fifteen prompts is not a serious sample of how people ask about your category.
• You want to know not just whether you appear but what AI says about you, and which arguments it repeats against you.
• Gemini and Google AI Mode are the surfaces you care about.
• You sell products and want visibility tracked at SKU level.
• Someone will act on source and citation analysis rather than just read a score.

Who should stay where they are

Stay on Otterly if your prompt set fits and nobody has yet acted on the data you already have. Paying three times more to collect more of an unused signal is the most common waste in this category. Stay on Peec if your team works from its source and perception reports: Otterly will tell you where you rank in AI answers, not why, and moving would mean rebuilding the prompt set and losing the history behind it.

Check the free options first

Neither tool is the first thing to try. Ahrefs runs three no-signup checkers, its AI Overviews Tracker, AI Mode Tracker and AI Visibility Checker, each giving a limited one-off snapshot. Opening ChatGPT or Perplexity and asking the question a customer would ask costs nothing and answers the only question that matters at the start, which is whether you come up at all. The full list is in free ways to check your AI visibility.

If you already pay for Ahrefs, Semrush, Surfer or Moz Pro, each now bundles or sells AI visibility tracking, which is usually cheaper than adding a platform. The comparison is in best AI visibility tools, and every tracker with a published price is in Profound alternatives.

Neither of them makes you more likely to be cited

Otterly and Peec both measure. They tell you where AI answers mention you, which competitors take your place and which pages get cited instead of yours. Neither changes the outcome by itself. Being cited depends on having content a model can point to: specific, evidenced, and about the questions your buyers actually ask. If the tracking keeps showing gaps because the pages do not exist yet, the problem is production, not measurement.

GrowGanic is built for that half. It is an autonomous SEO engine: add a domain and it researches the keywords, writes and scores the articles, publishes them to your site or a hosted blog, and tracks the rankings. On a paid plan it publishes every weekday. It is not a dedicated AI visibility tracker and has no backlink index, and, by GrowGanic's own account, the hosted copy of the free article stays out of Google until the plan is paid (connecting your site or a subdomain first avoids that), so it sits alongside a tracker rather than replacing one. The free tier gives you one article with no card. Try the free tier (affiliate link).

The verdict

Frequently asked questions

Related

Last reviewed 20 October 2026. Prices and plan structures are re-checked monthly. Spotted one out of date? Tell me.