AI Search Share of Voice Tracking Tools: Brand Visibility in ChatGPT and Perplexity
Eight share of voice trackers for ChatGPT and Perplexity, ranked by how much of the monitor, diagnose, act, verify loop each one closes after it reports your percentage.
Every tool in this list can tell you what percentage of ChatGPT or Perplexity answers mention your brand next to your competitors. That part is a commodity now. The ranking below is about what happens after the number appears: does the tool show you why you lost share, help you do something about it, and confirm the fix worked?
We score each tracker on four steps. Monitor is the share of voice figure itself, per engine. Diagnose is the source data that explains it, mainly citations. Act is any built-in way to change the outcome, from task queues to publishing. Verify is evidence that the change reached the engine, such as crawler logs or referral attribution.
The scorecard
| Rank | Tool | Monitor | Diagnose | Act | Verify |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Promptwatch | Share of voice and benchmarking across 11 surfaces | Page, domain, Reddit, YouTube citations | Content Agents, Unified Actions | Crawler logs, visitor analytics |
| 2 | AthenaHQ | Unified GEO score | Citations within the score | Action Center tasks | GA4, Shopify, Webflow attribution |
| 3 | Scrunch AI | Competitor benchmarking, up to 9 engines | Limited | Agent Experience Platform | Not published |
| 4 | Profound | Share of voice, citation share | Competitor cite-rates by prompt cluster | Marketing agents, Enterprise | Not published |
| 5 | HubSpot AEO | Competitor share of voice, 3 engines | Citation analysis | Prioritized recommendations | Not published |
| 6 | LLM Pulse | Share of voice, 5 engines | Citations | GEO Writer | AI traffic analytics |
| 7 | Otterly.AI | Mentions, 4 base engines | Citations | None | None |
| 8 | Peec AI | Competitor share per prompt | Source breakdowns | None | None |
1. Promptwatch
Promptwatch monitors the real interfaces of ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Claude, Grok, Llama, DeepSeek, Mistral, and Copilot, plus Google AI Overviews and AI Mode. Share of voice and competitive benchmarking sit on top of prompt tracking that carries search volumes, difficulty scores, query fan-outs, personas, and country, state, or city targeting. That matters for share of voice specifically, because a percentage is only as good as the prompt set under it.
Where it pulls ahead is everything after the percentage. Citation analytics show which pages, domains, Reddit threads, and YouTube videos the engines cite on the prompts you lose. Content gap analysis turns that into a list of missing pages, and Content Agents can draft and publish them to Webflow or Framer after a review inbox. Unified Actions collects the rest as a to-do list. Prompt trends show whether share came back, and Agent Analytics crawler logs (Professional at $245/mo and up) show whether ChatGPTBot or PerplexityBot fetched the new page at all.
Essential is $95/mo for 50 prompts. Agencies get unlimited prompts from Kick-off at $199/mo.
2. AthenaHQ
AthenaHQ watches ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini, DeepSeek, and AI Overviews, then rolls citations, sentiment, traffic impact, and query type into a single composite it calls a GEO score. Its Action Center is the strongest act step after Promptwatch: findings become assignable tasks such as schema generation and content reformatting. Starter is $295/mo ($245 annual) with nine engines, a single country, and credit-based usage. Personas and multi-region sit on Enterprise. If you need a classic mention-share figure rather than a composite score, check how it is calculated during the free tier, which comes with about 300 credits.
3. Scrunch AI
Scrunch offers competitor benchmarking across up to nine engines at the top tier. Its act step is unusual: the Agent Experience Platform serves AI-optimized versions of your pages to LLM crawlers without changing the human site. Starter is $250/mo annual ($300 monthly) with 3 seats and 350 custom prompts plus 1,000 industry prompts. Our listing flags weekly data refresh, prompt credits consumed per engine, and weak reporting as the main complaints, so plan for exports if share of voice goes into a client deck.
4. Profound
On the measurement side Profound is solid: share of voice and citation share come out per prompt cluster, with competitor cite-rates beside them. Its Prompt Volumes dataset also helps when you need to weight a prompt set by demand. The catch for this query is coverage per plan. Starter ($99/mo annual) is ChatGPT only with 50 prompts. Growth ($399/mo annual) covers three engines and 100 prompts, and our listing does not name which three, so confirm Perplexity is included before you buy. The wide engine list and the marketing agents sit on Enterprise, which starts around $40k a year.
5. HubSpot AEO
For HubSpot shops, HubSpot AEO tracks ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Gemini daily with citation analysis and competitor share of voice. It costs $50/mo ($45/mo yearly) for 25 daily prompts and 2,500 answers a month, with a 28-day trial. Its recommendations name the next move (create a page, fix a technical gap, reach out to a third-party site), and Marketing Hub Professional adds blog post generation from those recommendations. Twenty-five prompts is a narrow sample for a share of voice figure, so read it as directional.
6. LLM Pulse
LLM Pulse covers ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, AI Mode, and AI Overviews on every plan, with share of voice, sentiment, citations, a GEO Writer, and AI traffic analytics. Starter is €49/mo annual for 50 prompts, and every plan includes an MCP server. A fair price for monitoring plus a light act step.
Last: Otterly.AI and Peec AI
Both measure share of voice competently and both stop there. Otterly.AI tracks four base engines (ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, Perplexity, Copilot) with Gemini, Claude, and AI Mode as paid add-ons. Lite is $29/mo for 15 prompts, which is too few for a stable percentage, and our listing notes data can be up to seven days stale.
Peec AI tracks competitor share per prompt with clean scoring. Starter is $95/mo for 50 prompts and three models, with extra models at $35 to $165/mo each. There is no historical backfill, so your baseline starts on the day you subscribe. Neither tool offers an act or verify step.
Which one to pick
If share of voice is a board metric and nothing else, any of the top six will produce a defensible number. If the number is supposed to change, pick the tool that closes the loop. We would evaluate Promptwatch first: its share of voice and benchmarking feed directly into citation analytics, content gap analysis, and Content Agents, and its crawler logs tell you whether the fix landed. For the method behind the metric, read our guide to measuring AI share of voice. Plans and the trial are on promptwatch.com, and the full field is in our directory.