On this page
Your company reviews each rate or fee change before publishing it. AI answers can still quote the old number: in LendingTree’s survey of US chatbot users, 16% would start a financial-product search with a chatbot, more than would ask their bank.
The first entry is our own GEO Agent. The others rank by whether your reviewer can inspect an assistant’s exact claim, its source, and its match to your rate sheet.
1. GEO Agent by Qvery: Every Answer and Citation About You, Daily
- Questions written for you from your brand, industry and competitors.
- Daily runs on ChatGPT and Google AI Mode, in the countries you choose.
- Every answer and every citation, a page an answer points to, recorded.
- The sources assistants such as ChatGPT cite for your topics, and where competitors are named instead.
- Qvery Assistant for questions about your data, and reports to export.
Pros
- Questions written for you from your own brand and competitors
- Every answer and citation kept, every day
- Cited sources point to where a wrong number may come from
Cons
- Two engines (AI assistants): ChatGPT and Google AI Mode
- Locations by country
- Pricing not published
Our bias first: this entry is our own product. It uses your brand, industry, and competitors to prepare customer questions, then asks ChatGPT and Google AI Mode daily in your chosen countries. It retains the answers in full, including their citations.
When an answer quotes last year’s fee, its citations tell your reviewer where to look. The GEO Agent shows the sources cited for your topics and where a rival gets named instead.
Qvery Assistant lets you ask about your account’s data, change topics or questions, start a run, or export a report.
It measures two engines, by country. Your team or ours decides what to change; our work on the pages and the custom agents are a service quoted apart from the GEO Agent.
2. Profound: The Fact Check That Goes Down to the State
- A fact check of answers against the facts you load, on every plan.
- The cited URLs behind each inaccurate claim.
- Regions by country, state or province, or city.
- Answers exported from the FactCheck, Visibility, Sentiment and Prompts views.
- All-time history, CSV and JSON exports and the API, which lets your systems pull the data, on the custom plan.
What Reddit says
50.0 / 100
16 counted mentions, November 2025 to October 2026.
strongest on citation depth and multi-model coverage from what I've tested. More advanced and steeper learning curve
I’ve demoed profound too but it feels too big.
I think Profound is greatly overselling what they do.
Pros
- Each wrong claim comes with the pages behind it
- State-level locations for state-licensed products
- Exports and all-time history for an audit file
Cons
- No published price for the plan you would use
- The trial runs a prompt set Profound recommends
- Google AI Mode only on the custom plan
Profound’s fact-check docs describe a check against facts you load, with cited URLs behind inaccurate claims. They name regulated products and complex pricing as uses.
It is also the one tool here that documents a state or province as a location, next to country and city. A company licensed state by state can ask the same question as a customer in Texas and in New York and keep both answers.
The fact check is listed on every plan, but the trial runs a prompt set Profound picks, with no history and no exports, so the check on your own questions starts after a demo.
3. Peec AI: The Fact Check You Can Start Without a Demo
- Claim-by-claim check against facts you enter.
- The passage, question, model, date and sources behind each claim.
- Every chat stored with model, location and sources, and exportable.
- Daily runs and unlimited users on every self-serve plan.
What Reddit says
63.9 / 100
18 counted mentions, November 2025 to October 2026.
decent starting point, affordable, good if you just need basic visibility data without too much complexity
In the middle of the meeting, the CEO pulls out his phone, types one of our top prompts into ChatGPT, and nothing happens.
I am using Peec and it's great, but my problem is that I was tracking irrelevant prompts with no volume.
Pros
- The fact check without a sales call
- Every answer stored and exportable
- The export keeps claim, fact and verdict together
Cons
- The fact-check allowance per plan is not spelled out
- One country until Advanced
Peec AI checks answers against your facts too, and you can start from its pricing page. You enter the facts as plain statements; Peec splits each tracked answer into claims and checks them one at a time, so a wrong fee cannot hide inside a paragraph that is otherwise right.
Peec’s fact-checking help page says each finding keeps the passage, question, model, date, and sources; exports pair claims with facts and verdicts. A claim outside the facts you enter gets no verdict.
Every chat is stored and exportable with its full response, model, location, and sources.
4. AthenaHQ: Claim Review and an Audit Log, on a Contract
- A check of claims against your facts (custom plan).
- A flag where answers differ from your facts (custom plan).
- A log of who did what in the account (custom plan).
- 11 models on Starter, Google AI Mode included.
- One credit per AI answer, and a CSV export on Starter.
What Reddit says
Two user comments on AthenaHQ
AthenaHQ is more autonomous tools with recommendations and more personalised workflows
dashboards for AI visibility across platforms, feels very analytics heavy and is pretty much the same as Profound.
Pros
- Claim review and an audit log on one plan
- Google AI Mode on the self-serve plan
- One credit buys one answer, which makes the budget easy
Cons
- The checking features need a custom contract
- One region on Starter
- Little public documentation of how the check works
AthenaHQ lists two features a compliance lead will look for, a check of claims against your facts and a flag where answers differ from them, and next to them a log of who did what in the account. All three sit on the custom plan.
The self-serve Starter plan is the measuring half: 11 models with Google AI Mode among them, a CSV export, one region and one language. Credits count one per answer, so 3,600 credits buys 3,600 answers a month.
5. OtterlyAI: A Dated, Readable Answer File From $29
- Every run kept with its date.
- Full answer text and citation links one click away.
- CSV or JSON export.
- One country per prompt.
What Reddit says
63.6 / 100
11 counted mentions, November 2025 to October 2026.
Otterly is cheap when you start with a small number of prompts. But adding Gemini and Claude increases the real cost.
tracks citations inside AI answers, doesn't have all of the llms for tracking, but very budget friendly
Pros
- A readable, exportable answer file from $29
- A run date on every response
- Simple enough to hand to a reviewer
Cons
- No documented check against your facts
- One country per prompt slot
- Google AI Mode costs extra
OtterlyAI’s Responses tab lists each run by date and opens its full text and citations. Responses export as CSV or JSON, giving a reviewer a dated file without an API.
Locations take planning. A prompt belongs to one country, so asking the same question in the US and the UK uses two of your prompt slots, and on the 15-prompt Lite plan two markets eat the allowance quickly.
6. Ahrefs Brand Radar: The Full Answer, Country and Date in One API Row
- Question, full response, links, country and date in the API.
- Custom prompts with your choice of assistant, location and cadence.
- One check per prompt, platform, location and update.
- Custom-prompt API pulls use no API units.
- Part of the suite your SEO team may already use.
What Reddit says
MCP, in a quote below, is a way to connect an AI assistant to a tool's data.
31.3 / 100
8 counted mentions of Brand Radar and Ahrefs' AI features.
they came up with AI tools pretty early, and charged separately for each AI channel.
Just get Ahrefs and thier mcp connector with a decently regarded SEO skill.
Pros
- Question, answer, country and date documented in one API row
- Custom questions from $50 a month
- Location set per check
Cons
- No documented check against your facts
- The record lives in the API, not on a reviewer's screen
- Users complain about packaging and price
Ahrefs Brand Radar’s custom prompts let you choose assistants, location, and cadence. Its AI Responses API returns the question, full response, links, country, and last-updated date.
Pulling custom-prompt data through that API uses no API units. Nothing in it reads the answers against your rate sheet, so a person or a script does that part; for a company with an analyst who likes working in an API, that is a fair trade at $50 a month.
7. Scrunch: Every Answer Kept, Through the API on the Custom Plan
- Full answers and citations for every run, through the Responses API.
- Country set per prompt.
- 5,000 responses a month on Core.
- A 7-day trial on Core.
What Reddit says
Two user comments on Scrunch; share of voice means how often you are named against rivals
We track 50+ prompts weekly/monthly with the help of Scrunch Ai.
I think it's best understood as Share of Voice, which both Scrunch and Profound offer in my experience.
Pros
- The full answer for every run, documented
- Says which engines return country-specific answers
Cons
- API on the custom plan only
- One country on Core
- No documented check against your facts
Scrunch’s API FAQ says its Responses API captures full answers, citations, sentiment, competitors, and metadata for each run. Country is set per prompt; country-specific results depend on engines with geolocated search, which depends on where the asker is, including ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Google AI Overviews.
The $250 Core plan tracks one country and one language on four engines; the API and Google AI Mode sit on the custom plan. A finance team that wants the record outside the app is buying that plan.
8. Rankscale: Hourly Runs, With the Full Answer a Pull Away
- Hourly to monthly schedules.
- All regions on every plan.
- Complete answer and citations through a connected assistant.
- CSV and Google Sheets exports.
What Reddit says
90.0 / 100
5 counted mentions.
I thought Rankscale was pretty comprehensive for the price. Not the prettiest UI but good coverage for the price.
very user friendly and budget friendly. The only I miss in this tool is logfile integration to monitor real citations.
the prompt suggestion feature makes it very easy to build and manage the prompts also in languages I don’t speak.
Pros
- The most flexible schedule here
- The lowest entry price on this list
- Reddit users rate it good value for the price
Cons
- The full answer is a pull, not a screen
- No documented check against your facts
- Two reviews on G2
Rankscale’s changelog documents full answers and citations pulled through a connected assistant. Schedules range from hourly to monthly, all plans cover all regions, and exports go to CSV or Google Sheets.
It sits last because the record is something you pull rather than a screen a reviewer reads, and nothing in its documentation checks an answer against your facts.
How the Eight Compare on the Record a Reviewer Keeps
The table puts the eight on one screen: what a reviewer needs, plus the cheapest listed way in.
| Tool | The full answer | Checked against your facts; location | Lowest listed price | Start With It If |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Qvery's GEO Agent | Every answer and citation, daily | By your team, or ours as a service; Countries you choose | Not published | Questions written for you |
| Profound | Exports on the custom plan | Yes, every plan; Country, state or city | Custom plan; trial at no charge | Licensed state by state |
| Peec AI | Every chat, exportable | Yes: facts you enter; Stored with each chat | $95 a month | No demo first |
| AthenaHQ | CSV export on Starter | Claim review, custom plan; One region on Starter | Essential at no charge; Starter $295 | Auditors ask questions |
| OtterlyAI | Every run, CSV or JSON | Not documented; One country per prompt | $29 a month | A dated file |
| Ahrefs Brand Radar | Full response in the API | Not documented; Location per check | $50 a month | Already on Ahrefs |
| Scrunch | Responses API, custom plan | Not documented; Country per prompt | $250 a month | Records outside the app |
| Rankscale | Pulled by a connected assistant | Not documented; All regions | $17 a month, billed yearly | Cheap daily snapshots |
What Qvery Does Beside These Tools
At Qvery, we help lenders, card and payments companies free up their compliance team's week for decisions instead of line-by-line reading, with custom AI agents that read every stored answer against your approved rate sheet, flag the sentences that contradict it and send compliance only what the sheet cannot confirm.
Qvery’s agents connect to the systems your product and compliance teams use, nothing leaves the company until a person has seen it, and compliance decides what to do about each flag.
The GEO Agent keeps the daily answer record that this review needs.
Put Your Rate-Sheet Review to Work
Your compliance team shows us how it reviews rate claims today, and we agree what the agents may read and change. Two weeks after access is in place, a first working agent is checking answers against your own rate sheets, with a person approving every change at first.
Frequently asked questions
Does a finance company need an AI visibility tool at all?
Only if someone will read what it collects. A tool earns its fee when the questions, engines or markets outgrow one person.
How often do AI assistants get financial facts wrong?
Often, by one test. Saturn, a UK fintech firm that sells AI to advice firms, asked AI models 121 UK personal-finance questions and found the answers wrong 57% of the time, and 88% of the time on complex ones.
Do customers act on what AI assistants say about money?
Many do. In LendingTree’s July 2025 survey of US chatbot users, 49% said AI had influenced at least one financial decision, and 30% named opening or closing an account or a loan.
Does using one of these tools make us compliant?
No. These tools show what AI answers say, and none presents itself as a compliance control; counsel decides what you must monitor, and your reviewer uses the record to find wrong statements.
Can these tools track answers state by state?
Of the seven outside trackers, only Profound documents a state or province as a location; the rest work by country, and Scrunch says its country-specific results come from engines with geolocated search.
Who in the company should own what AI assistants say about us?
Compliance should own the approved wording, while product or finance owns the numbers. Marketing or operations can own collection, corrections to your pages, and requests to publishers carrying old figures.
Our SEO suite already has an AI module. Is that enough?
It can be, if someone on the team works comfortably with an API. Ahrefs Brand Radar returns the question, the full response, its links, the country and the date for your own custom prompts, which is most of a reviewer's record; the check against your rate sheet is still yours to build or staff.
How often should we check?
As often as someone can read what comes back, and always in the weeks after a rate or fee changes. Daily collection with a weekly review of the flagged sentences is a rhythm one reviewer can keep; hourly collection only helps if someone reads hourly.
What does a longer question list cost?
More than the cheapest plan in the table. OtterlyAI goes from 15 questions at $29 a month to 100 at $189, and Peec AI holds 150 at $245, so start the budget from the list, not the lowest price.
Are credits the same as tracked questions?
No. AthenaHQ charges one credit per answer, and Ahrefs counts a check for each question, assistant, location, and update, so every repeat run draws on the allowance again.
Will adding reviewers raise the bill?
Not on Peec AI's self-serve plans, which include unlimited users, so marketing and compliance can each have access without a bigger plan.
Is a free option enough for ongoing review?
For a first look, yes; for a review record, no. AthenaHQ's free Essential plan has 300 credits, and Profound's free trial lasts 7 days with no history or exports.
What if two tools report different answers?
Check where and when each was asked. Peec AI stores the question, assistant, location, and date with every answer, and Ahrefs returns the country and last-updated date, so two answers from different places or days can both be right.
Does a higher plan cover more assistants?
Not on Peec AI: Starter, Pro, and Advanced each list 3 models, while the questions and projects grow.
Is Google AI Mode included in the monthly price?
It depends on the tool. OtterlyAI charges $9, $59, or $149 a month for it on Lite, Standard, or Premium, while AthenaHQ includes it on Starter.
Can separate product teams share the lowest plan?
They can share access on Peec AI, but each project is a limit: Starter has 1, Pro 2, and Advanced 5, so lending and payments teams that want their own projects may need Pro.
