What a GEO tracker actually does
A GEO tracker monitors whether AI engines mention or cite your brand. It runs prompts through ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, and Google AI Overviews on a schedule. Then it reports your visibility, your position in answers, and your share of voice against competitors.
If GEO is new to you, start with our plain-English guide: GEO Explained: What Marketers Need to Know About AI Search in 2026. This article assumes you know why AI citations matter and want to measure them.
The core capabilities to compare are simple. Citation frequency: how often AI mentions you. Share of voice: how you stack up against competitors. Source tracking: which of your pages AI engines actually pull from. Prompt coverage: how many questions the tool monitors, and across how many AI platforms.
🔎 The Honest Filter
GEO trackers range from free to $1,000+ per month. Most marketers reading vendor comparison pages end up over-buying. Match the tool to your publishing volume and your boss's reporting expectations — not to the feature list.
1. Mangools AI Search Grader — best free starting point
A free tool that grades your brand's visibility across AI engines, including ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and Mistral. You enter your brand and get a snapshot of how AI models see you.
Where it falls short: It's a snapshot, not monitoring. No scheduled tracking, no competitor share of voice, no alerts. Think diagnostic, not dashboard.
Works well
- Free — zero commitment
- Covers multiple AI engines
- Fast first read on your AI visibility
- Good for one-off client audits
Watch out for
- No ongoing monitoring
- No competitor benchmarking
- Limited depth per report
- You'll outgrow it if GEO becomes a KPI
2. Otterly AI — best budget monitoring
Otterly is the most credible budget option we found. The Lite plan tracks 15 search prompts for $29 per month. It monitors brand mentions, link citations, and sentiment across major AI platforms. The Standard plan jumps to 100 prompts at $189 per month.
Where it falls short: 15 prompts is tight. You'll spend real time choosing which questions matter most. Deeper analytics sit behind the higher tiers.
Works well
- Real monitoring at $29/month
- Simple, non-technical interface
- Tracks citations and sentiment
- Easy step up as needs grow
Watch out for
- 15 prompts on the entry plan
- Big price jump to the next tier
- Less advanced analytics than rivals
3. HubSpot AEO — easiest for HubSpot shops
HubSpot's answer engine optimization tool tracks 25 prompts across ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Gemini. It's free for the first 28 days, then $50 per month. If your company already runs on HubSpot, this is the lowest-friction option to get AI visibility into existing reports.
Where it falls short: It's newer than the specialists and the prompt cap is fixed. Teams outside the HubSpot ecosystem get less value from the integration story.
Works well
- 28-day free trial, no sales call
- 25 prompts for $50/month
- Native fit with HubSpot reporting
- Simple enough to demo to a boss
Watch out for
- Fixed prompt cap
- Fewer engines than specialists
- Young product, still maturing
4. Peec AI — best mid-tier for competitive tracking
Peec AI is built for marketing teams that need proper competitive benchmarking. It tracks brand performance across six AI engines with prompt organization, brand ranking, and source identification. Analytics are noticeably deeper than the budget tier.
Where it falls short: At roughly $95 per month, it needs a business case. Solo marketers and small blogs rarely have the citation volume to justify it yet.
Works well
- Six AI engines, no add-ons
- Strong competitor benchmarking
- Source identification is genuinely useful
- Built for team workflows
Watch out for
- ~$95/month entry point
- Overkill below ~10k monthly visits
- Euro pricing adds exchange friction
5. Profound — the enterprise heavyweight
Profound is the market leader in AI search intelligence and raised a $96M Series C in 2026. Large brands use it for deep AI visibility tracking at serious scale. If you work in enterprise marketing, this is the name your leadership has already heard.
Where it falls short: Pricing is enterprise-level and opaque. Monthly costs commonly run well past $500. This is a procurement decision, not a credit-card signup.
Works well
- Deepest tracking on the market
- Strong momentum and funding
- Enterprise-grade reporting
- Handles huge prompt volumes
Watch out for
- Enterprise pricing only
- Massive overkill for most readers
- Long sales and onboarding cycle
Head-to-head verdict
| Criterion | Mangools | Otterly | HubSpot AEO | Peec AI | Profound |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Entry Price | Free Best | $29/mo | $50/mo | €89/mo | Enterprise |
| Ongoing Monitoring | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes Best |
| Competitor Tracking | No | Basic | Basic | Strong Best | Strong |
| Ease of Start | Instant Best | Easy | Easy | Moderate | Sales call |
| Best For | First audit | Solo marketers Best | HubSpot teams | Growing teams | Enterprise |
💡 Our Recommendation
Do this in order. Run Mangools free to get a baseline. If AI answers matter to your traffic, start Otterly at $29 or HubSpot's 28-day trial. Graduate to Peec when a competitor starts beating you in AI answers. Ignore Profound unless procurement is involved.
The free alternative: track GEO manually
Here's what the vendor listicles won't say. At low traffic volumes, you can track GEO with zero tools. We did exactly this in our four-week GEO experiment — manual prompt testing found real citation changes without a subscription.
The manual workflow takes about 30 minutes a week. Write 10–12 prompts your customers would actually ask. Run each through ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Google AI Overviews monthly. Record mentions and cited URLs in a spreadsheet. Watch Google Search Console for AI-driven query patterns.
This mirrors the approach in our free AI competitor content audit workflow. Free works until your prompt list outgrows a spreadsheet. That's the honest trigger point for paying.