Profound Alternatives for Enterprise Teams (Source-Checked Pricing)

Profound sits at the enterprise end of AI visibility: Answer Engine Insights, Agent Analytics for AI-sourced traffic attribution, Prompt Volumes, plus Profound Agents and Sheets. It is also the tool most likely to send a team looking for alternatives before they ever use it — and the reason has moved since this page was first written. When we read its pricing page in a live browser on July 20, 2026, no per-plan figures rendered at all. On a re-read on August 29, 2026, that page publishes two of its three tiers: Starter at $99/month and Growth at $399/month, both billed yearly. The third one does not move. Enterprise — the tier that carries SSO/SAML, SOC2 and API access — is still "Custom." So the number now exists, and it stops exactly where enterprise buying begins. If your evaluation process needs a figure before a sales call — and most do, even inside large companies — that is why searches like "Profound alternative for enterprise teams" keep their shape even after a pricing page opens up.

This roundup keeps the same evidence rule as our Outrank alternatives piece: every competitor figure below was read from the vendor's own pages, and carries the date it was read. Profound and Otterly.ai were re-read on August 29, 2026; the Peec AI figures are still the July 20, 2026 reading, and the source list further down says so per cell. Where a vendor does not publish a number, the entry says so rather than repeating a figure from someone's blog post. And one disclosure up front: TriRank is our product — it is in the list because it belongs there, and it is labelled so you can discount it accordingly.

What Profound actually publishes

Profound's plan matrix names three tiers. Read on August 29, 2026 at tryprofound.com/pricing, it says:

• Starter — $99/month, billed yearly. ChatGPT tracking only. 50 unique prompts, 1,500 responses monthly, daily. 1 language, 1 region, 1 seat. API: no. SSO: no. Exports: none.
• Growth — $399/month, billed yearly, and the tier the page badges "Popular." ChatGPT, Perplexity and Google AI Overviews. 100 unique prompts, 9,000 responses monthly, daily. 3 seats. CSV and JSON exports. API: no. SSO: no.
• Enterprise — "Custom." Up to 9 answer engines, multiple companies tracked, a tailored prompt plan, dedicated Slack support with a 24-hour SLA, and the row the other two answer "no" to: API yes, SSO yes.

Both priced tiers carry a "2 months free" annual note; the page offers a monthly-billing toggle whose figures are not in the HTML we can read, so the two numbers above are the yearly-billed rate.

Two things follow from that matrix, and both matter for anyone comparing alternatives. First, the procurement features — SSO/SAML, SOC2, API access — sit on the Enterprise tier, which is the one tier still without a published price. A pricing page that opens up from the bottom does not help the buyer who came for the top. Second, the entry tier tracks ChatGPT only, so the multi-engine coverage that defines the category starts at Growth, not at the bottom.

What changed since July. On July 20, 2026 the same page rendered no per-plan figures for any tier. We are recording both readings with their dates rather than overwriting the older one, because a comparison page whose numbers silently update is a page you cannot audit. What has not changed in that window is the shape of the argument below: the tier an enterprise buyer is shopping for is still quoted, not published.

None of this is a criticism of the product. It is a positioning fact: Profound is built and sold for bespoke enterprise deployments, and if that is what you are buying, the right move is to get the quote. The alternatives below exist for teams — including enterprise teams — whose actual requirement is the visibility work itself, at a price they can read before talking to sales.

The field at a glance

Profound and Otterly.ai re-read August 29, 2026; Peec AI and TriRank figures from July 20, 2026. Entry prices are floors that rise with prompts, models or seats — and for Profound the entry price is billed yearly.

1. Peec AI — the closest analytics substitute

Peec AI calls itself "AI search analytics for marketing teams," and of the published-pricing tools it sits nearest to Profound's analytics-led shape. Published plans: Starter $95/month (50 prompts, 1 project), Pro $245/month (150 prompts, 2 projects), Advanced $495/month (350 prompts, 5 projects, Looker Studio), plus an Enterprise tier on custom pricing with API, SSO and up to 11 models. Every paid plan lets you choose 3 models from ChatGPT, AI Mode, AI Overviews, Copilot, Perplexity and Gemini; additional models cost $35 / $85 / $165 per month depending on plan. The site says it is trusted by 2,500+ marketing teams.

Pick it if: you want Profound-style competitor benchmarking and daily analytics with a price you can read, and Looker Studio reporting at the top tier. Watch out for: the three-model default — covering six engines means paying add-ons on top of the plan, and its own enterprise features (API, SSO) also retreat to a custom-priced tier.

2. Otterly.ai — the lowest published floor

Otterly.ai monitors whether your brand and website appear across AI engines. Published pricing: Lite $29/month for 15 search prompts, Standard $189/month for 100 prompts, Premium $489/month for 400 prompts, with 15% off annually ($25 / $160 / $422 per month). Plans include ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, Perplexity and Microsoft Copilot; Claude, Gemini and Google AI Mode are paid add-ons, and extra prompt packs are $99/month per 100. Standard and above list API access and an MCP integration. Its homepage claims 30,000+ marketing professionals.

Pick it if: you want to start monitoring at the lowest possible published price and scale prompt volume later. Watch out for: engine add-ons and prompt packs move the real cost well above the $29 headline, and monitoring alone does not tell you which of your existing rankings AI engines are ignoring.

3. TriRank — the rankings × citations join (that's us)

Full disclosure again: this is our product. TriRank sweeps every engine on its roster — Google (Gemini grounding), ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude and Google AI Overview, all included on every plan, no per-model add-ons — and then does the thing that makes the sweep actionable: it joins those verdicts to your own Google Search Console data. The output is the citation gap: the keywords where you already rank on page one and no AI engine cites you. In one production account we looked at, 547 page-one keywords produced exactly one AI citation — the write-up is here.

Pricing is published: Starter $49/month, Pro $149/month, and Agency $399/month with white-label reports — the full breakdown is on the pricing page. The domain diagnostic is free forever, the free tools need no account, and the MCP server is read-only and free at 500 calls per day. If you would rather buy an outcome than a subscription, there is a one-time $399 AEO audit.

Pick it if: you want to know which of your existing rankings AI ignores, want the content work in the same place, and want to budget from a pricing page instead of a quote. Watch out for: no public REST API, no SSO/SAML or SOC2 claims, weekly rather than daily sweeps, and publishing is WordPress-only today. If those procurement features are hard requirements, you are shopping in Profound's tier, not ours.

Who measures what — and where each answer came from

The table at the top compares price. This one compares the thing you are actually buying: what each tool measures, and whether you can check the answer yourself. Cells are short on purpose; the verbatim wording and the URL behind each one are in the source list underneath.

Where each cell came from. Not published means not stated on the page named here — it is a fact about a page we read, not a claim about what a vendor can do.

• Profound — tryprofound.com/pricing and tryprofound.com, both read August 29, 2026. The feature matrix answers API and SSO with "No" on Starter and Growth and "Yes" on Enterprise; prompt frequency reads "Daily" on all three. The crawler cell is the homepage's own description of Agent Analytics: "Track how your site is interpreted and crawled by ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Perplexity, and more." The integrations row lists Akamai, AWS, Cloudflare, Fastly, Google Analytics, Google Cloud Platform, Netlify, Vercel and WordPress — Google Search Console is not among them, and does not appear anywhere on the page.
• Peec AI — peec.ai/pricing, plan matrix read August 29, 2026: "Choose 3 models" on Starter, Pro and Advanced, from ChatGPT, AI Mode, AI Overviews, Microsoft Copilot, Perplexity and Gemini; API access, MCP integration and SSO appear on Enterprise only, which is "Custom" with a "Talk to Sales" button. The price figures do not render in the page HTML we can read, so the $95/month above is still our July 20, 2026 browser reading and has not been re-checked since. Treat it as the older number on this page.
• Otterly.ai — otterly.ai/pricing, read August 29, 2026: Lite $29, Standard $189, Premium $489 per month, all with "Sign up now"; "Tracking of 4 AI Search Engines: ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, Perplexity, MS Copilot" with "Claude, Google AI-Mode, Gemini as extra Add-ons"; daily tracking on all three; API and MCP access from Standard up. Its Enterprise tier is the only unpriced tier in this roundup that still names a floor — "Custom … Starting from $1,000/month." The crawler cell is a free "AI Crawler Simulation" tool linked from that page's footer, not a line in the plan matrix.
• TriRank — our own pricing page, the methodology write-up for how the probes and the score work, and the two public data pages in the next section. The extension source is at github.com/supersky0820/trirank-extension (read August 29, 2026); the platform behind it is not open source, and the cell says "extension only" for that reason.

Two rows deserve a word against our own interest. Probe frequency: everyone else on this table runs daily and we run weekly. If you need to see a swing the day it happens, that row is a reason to buy one of the other three. And "top tier carries a number" is not a compliment we are paying ourselves — we have no enterprise tier at all, which is the same fact as "no SSO/SAML, no SOC2, no public REST API," written from the other side.

Three numbers of our own, and the page each one sits on

Every tool above, ours included, will tell you it measures AI visibility. Here is what our own measurements actually say — each with its date, its sample, and the public page where the same figure is published, so you can check it instead of taking it.

1. On "alternatives" queries, being a known brand is not enough. Across 101 SaaS brands, three prompts each, run on Perplexity in July 2026: the engine cited 91% of those brands when asked about them by name, and 55% when asked for alternatives in their category. Narrow it to the brands the engine demonstrably knows — the ones it cited by name — and 42%, or 39 of 92, were not cited at all in the alternatives answer. The full breakdown is on our AI visibility benchmark. If you are on this page because you searched for a Profound alternative, that is exactly the query shape in question, and it is the shape where recognised brands go missing.

2. AI crawlers arrive at very different rates — and volume is the wrong column to read. Across 58 days, June 26 to August 22, 2026, our own edge logged 11,912 AI-crawler requests to HTML pages on trirankai.com, from 12 of the 13 crawler User-Agents we track. Days seen is the more stubborn number: PerplexityBot appeared on 42 of those days, GPTBot on 24, ClaudeBot on 9. The caveat we publish beside that data and repeat here is load-bearing — Meta-ExternalAgent alone is 66.7% of the total, and it is a content and social-preview crawler rather than an answer engine, so the volume column says very little about AI answer visibility. The whole table is on AI crawler stats, and the Chrome extension runs the same reachability test against whatever page you happen to be on. One property, ours, is the entire sample — that is a limit, and it is why the page states it before the numbers.

3. Most of the citations you are competing for are not on your own site. In that same 101-brand run, only 10% of citations pointed at the brand's own domain; the other 90% landed on somebody else's. The most-cited single host was reddit.com at 9.1% of all citations, appearing for 98 of the 101 brands, then youtube.com at 8% and g2.com at 3.9%. The ranking is on the sources AI actually cites. A tool that only watches your own domain is watching the smaller tenth of the problem.

None of these three is a product claim, and none of them says we win. They are the arithmetic that decides whether any of these tools is worth buying — and they are on public pages with their sample size and their dates attached, which is the standard we would like to be held to. If you want the same measurements run against your own domain instead of a benchmark, the free diagnostic does it without an account, and the MCP server will answer the same questions from inside Claude or any MCP client at 500 calls a day.

When Profound is still the right call

Honesty cuts both ways. If your requirement list includes SSO/SAML, SOC2 attestation, API access, and attribution across its full answer-engine list and many domains, that is precisely what Profound's Enterprise tier is built around, and none of the published-pricing tools above — ours included — advertises that stack. An enterprise buyer with those constraints should get the Profound quote and evaluate it on fit, not avoid it on principle.

Four situations where we would tell you to buy Profound rather than us, and mean it:

• Security review is a gate, not a preference. If a vendor without SOC2 attestation and SSO/SAML cannot be signed at all, the shortlist is settled before any feature comparison starts. We have neither, and saying so is cheaper for both of us than a demo.
• The data has to leave the tool. Enterprise is the only tier on that matrix with API access, and a team that needs AI-visibility data landing in its own warehouse beside everything else is buying the API, not the dashboard. We do not publish one.
• Many brands, many regions, many languages. Profound's Enterprise row reads "Multiple companies tracked" with custom languages and regions. A holding company with a dozen brands in eight markets is a different product than a site owner with one domain.
• A same-day swing has to be visible. Their probe frequency is daily on every tier; ours is weekly. If your team reacts to AI-answer movement inside a news cycle, weekly is not a smaller version of daily — it is the wrong instrument.

The point of this page is narrower than any of those: a large share of teams searching for a "Profound alternative" do not actually have those procurement constraints. They have the visibility problem — where do AI engines cite us, where do they not, and what closes the gap — plus a budget owner who wants a number today. For that job, the tools above cover the category at readable prices. And note what the August re-read did not change: Profound now publishes its two lower tiers, so if 50 prompts on ChatGPT at $99/month is genuinely the job, the honest answer is that you no longer need an alternative to find that out.

How to choose

Answer one question first: are you buying procurement-grade infrastructure, or the visibility work?

If it is infrastructure — SSO, SOC2, API, the full answer-engine list — get the Profound quote; that is the category, and it is the part of their line-up that is still quoted rather than priced. If it is the work, pick by scope: Otterly.ai is the cheapest way to start monitoring, Peec AI is the closest analytics substitute with published pricing, and TriRank is the one that joins citations to your own Search Console rankings and does the content work in the same place.

Before you shop, size the stakes: our AI visibility ROI calculator shows the arithmetic on the page, and the free diagnostic checks your own domain without an account. Then compare head-to-head: TriRank vs Peec AI, TriRank vs Otterly.ai, or the wider Outrank alternatives roundup if article production is part of the brief.

Every figure on this page carries the date it was checked, and after the August 29, 2026 re-read those dates are no longer all the same one — the source list above says which reading each cell is. Vendors change pricing often, and Profound moved between our two reads; if you find something out of date here, tell us and we will correct it.

FAQ

What is the best Profound alternative for enterprise teams? It depends on which part of Profound you need. If the requirement is procurement-grade infrastructure — SSO/SAML, SOC2, API access across its full answer-engine list — Profound's Enterprise tier is the category, and the honest move is to get the quote. Note that this is the one tier Profound still does not price: on August 29, 2026 its pricing page published Starter at $99/month and Growth at $399/month, and left Enterprise as "Custom." If the requirement is the visibility work itself — knowing where AI engines cite you and closing the gaps — Peec AI, Otterly.ai and TriRank cover it at published prices.

How much does Profound cost? Profound prices two of its three tiers. Re-read on August 29, 2026, its pricing page shows Starter at $99/month (ChatGPT tracking only, 50 prompts, 1,500 responses per month) and Growth at $399/month (ChatGPT, Perplexity and Google AI Overviews, 100 prompts, 9,000 responses per month), both billed yearly with two months free. Enterprise — up to 9 answer engines, SSO/SAML and SOC2 compliance, API access, dedicated Slack support — remains "Custom," so that tier still needs a quote. When we first read the same page on July 20, 2026, no per-plan figures rendered at all.

Is there a Profound alternative with published pricing? Yes, and since August 29, 2026 that includes Profound itself below the Enterprise tier. Otterly.ai publishes plans from $29/month, Peec AI from $95/month, and TriRank from $49/month (Starter), with Pro at $149/month and Agency at $399/month. Otterly.ai and Profound were re-read on August 29, 2026; the Peec AI and TriRank figures are the July 20, 2026 readings. Publishing a price is not a feature, but it does mean you can budget without a sales call.

Does TriRank replace Profound? For the citation-visibility job, yes at a different scale; for enterprise procurement requirements, no. TriRank sweeps every engine on its roster on every plan and joins the verdicts to your own Google Search Console data, at $49–$399/month published pricing. It does not advertise SSO/SAML, SOC2 or a public REST API, which are exactly what Profound's Enterprise tier is built around. Match the tool to which of those two jobs you are actually buying.