The 10 best AEO platforms for UK businesses in 2026

All prices in this guide were verified against vendor pricing pages on 22 August 2026 and converted at £1 = $1.36 and £1 = €1.17.

That split matters. The category has quietly divided into two products sold under one name: platforms that tell you what the engines are saying, and platforms that tell you what to do about it. Most of the market is the first kind. This guide ranks on the second.

Two platforms that appear on other lists are absent from this one: PromptWatch and AI Clicks. Neither met the inclusion threshold set out in the methodology below.

We scored every platform on seven weighted criteria. The weighting is published so you can disagree with it and re-rank the table yourself.

Three things we deliberately did not score on: the size of a vendor's marketing budget, the number of AI models it claims to query (a model API isn't an answer surface a buyer uses), and self-reported accuracy claims that no third party can verify.

AI answer surfaces are now a mainstream UK discovery channel, and the click economics beneath them have changed permanently.

• Roughly 30% of UK searches now return an AI summary, and 53% of UK adults say they see these summaries often. ChatGPT took 1.8 billion UK visits in the first eight months of 2025, up from 368 million in the same period of 2024 (Ofcom, Online Nation 2025, published 10 December 2025).
• Both Google AI surfaces are live in the UK. AI Overviews launched here in August 2024. Google AI Mode launched in the UK on 29 July 2025, the third market worldwide, and without the Labs opt-in the US launch required.
• The UK has the highest zero-click rate of any major market measured. 69.5% of UK Google searches end without a click, ahead of the United States at 68.0% and every other country in the study. The panel excludes Google's mobile app, so the authors note the true figure is higher still (SparkToro and Similarweb, published 16 June 2026).
• Clicks fall when an AI summary appears. In a US panel, Google users clicked a traditional result on 8% of visits where an AI summary was present, against 15% where it wasn't, and ended their session entirely 26% of the time against 16% (Pew Research, 900 US adults and 68,879 searches, 22 July 2025).
• The traffic that does arrive converts. In US retail data, AI-sourced traffic converted 42% better than non-AI traffic in March 2026. Twelve months earlier the same traffic converted 38% worse (Adobe Analytics, over one trillion visits).
• UK consumers are further ahead than the rest of Europe. 64% of UK consumers trust AI-assisted shopping, the highest rate in Europe, and AI platforms including ChatGPT generated 50.2 million monthly shopping-intent visits in the UK (Retail Economics and Metapack, 8,000 consumers and 400 retailers, February 2026).
• UK marketers are ahead of the global average on spend. 70% of UK marketers say they're actively investing in generative engine optimisation, against 54% globally, and 81% are considering new tooling (Optimizely survey of 1,000 marketers, April 2026, reported by CMOtech UK).

One honest counterweight, because you'll be asked about it in a budget meeting: AI referrals are still a very small share of total sessions. ChatGPT accounted for 0.32% of all web traffic in May 2026, an all-time high, though UK referrals grew 38.7% month on month, faster than the US at 23.2% (SE Ranking, 101,574 sites). A 42% conversion premium on 1% of your sessions isn't yet a reason to move your paid search budget. It's a reason to start measuring, because the base is compounding and the cost of arriving late to a channel where recommendations are formed upstream of any click is high.

One regulatory point that should shape your contract length. The Competition and Markets Authority imposed a publisher conduct requirement on Google on 3 June 2026, giving publishers tools to prevent their content powering AI features including AI Overviews, and requiring proper attribution with clear links in AI-generated results. Google has nine months to implement, so the mechanics of citation and attribution in the UK will change by around March 2027. A fair ranking conduct requirement followed on 17 June 2026, covering generative AI features explicitly. Sign twelve-month terms, not three-year ones.

Every figure below comes from the vendor's own published pricing or documentation page, checked on 22 August 2026. Currency conversions use £1 = $1.36 and £1 = €1.17.

What “AI search customer journey” means in this table. We score a Yes only where a platform assigns tracked prompts to buying stages, then shows visibility at each stage, identifies the stage where the brand stops being named, and links that loss back to the answers and sources responsible. Tagging prompts by stage isn't enough on its own, and neither is measuring aggregate demand for prompts. Searchable comes closest of the rest: its documentation recommends splitting a prompt set roughly 30% awareness, 40% consideration and 30% decision, and it reports buying-stage data, but it doesn't map the drop-off. On this definition Answyn is the only Yes in the table.

A note on Searchable's limits. Searchable's live pricing page and its own documentation disagree with each other. The pricing page advertises unlimited projects on Professional and Scale at $125 and $400. The documentation describes a different structure entirely: Starter, Professional and Agency at $100, $300 and $750, with 1, 2 and 5 tracked domains and 50, 100 and 1,000 prompts. We've used the pricing page throughout because it's the page a buyer transacts on, and we flag the conflict rather than pick a winner. Get your allowance in writing.

This is the comparison that matters, because it's where the add-on economics show up. Each column is that vendor's nearest tier to £350 a month, which in Ahrefs' case is a good deal cheaper and in Peec's slightly dearer.

Read the content-brief and crawler-analytics rows together. Peec Advanced costs slightly more than Answyn Business and doesn't generate content briefs: its own Actions page describes the feature as handling “the research, analysis, and prioritization so you know exactly what to build and where to focus”, which is prioritisation, not a brief. Ahrefs is the cheapest column here and can't see a single AI crawler hitting your website. Those aren't small gaps, and they're the difference between a reporting tool and a working system.

Answyn is an AI search visibility platform built for the UK market, priced at £149 and £349 a month. It tracks buyer questions daily across four published consumer AI answer surfaces (Gemini, ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, and Google AI Mode). Custom plans can also cover Microsoft Copilot, Perplexity, and Claude. It maps where in the customer journey a brand stops being named, ranks the resulting gaps by impact against effort, and turns each one into a writing and schema brief. It publishes no composite score, and every headline figure opens back to the answer that produced it.

Website: answyn.com · Pricing: answyn.com/pricing · Entity: Luto Ventures Ltd, England and Wales

Prices exclude VAT. Answyn is not currently VAT registered, so no VAT is added at checkout.

What it does well:

• One price, not a base plan plus a maze of add-ons. Pro and Business include their engines, brands, competitors, briefs and reports in the headline figure. Elsewhere in this guide, extra engines are charged per model, extra domains are charged per domain, and seats, API access and exports sit behind higher tiers. The tier price is the bill.
• It maps the customer journey, not just the prompt list. Prompts are assigned to one of four stages (Problem, Options, Comparison, Validation). The customer journey map then shows visibility at each stage and the exact point where the brand falls away, a Replay reconstructs a buyer session in order from real collected answers, and a why panel attaches the sources and actions responsible for the loss. Several rivals let you tag prompts by buying stage. Searchable, for instance, recommends a 30/40/30 split across awareness, consideration and decision in its own documentation. Tagging tells you what a prompt is. A drop-off map tells you where you're losing the customer, and that's a different product.
• It refuses a composite score, which is the category's biggest unfixed problem. One analysis found the same brand on the same data scoring 20% share of voice on a mention basis, 16.8% position-weighted and 31.4% citation-based, purely from the choice of formula (Canonry, 30 June 2026). Another notes that no major platform publishes its scoring methodology at all (Metricus, April 2026). Answyn keeps mention rate, prominence, share of voice, sentiment and citation share separate and traceable. If a number can't be opened back to an answer, it's not shown.
• Actions are derived, not invented. Six kinds (content gap, citation gap, losing to a competitor, uncited mention, sentiment risk, declining visibility), each carrying the prompts, competitors, domains and answers that produced it, sorted by impact against effort. Gaps that close in the data drop off the list on their own.
• Briefs cover both halves of the job. A writing brief (outline, facts to include, proof points, social angles) and a technical brief (schema.org types, implementation steps, JSON-LD notes) generated from your collected answers rather than a generic industry template. Peec, the closest priced rival, doesn't generate briefs at all.
• Reports are board-ready and shareable. A self-contained HTML document composed from the same record as the dashboard, with figures frozen at the moment of composition so a later collection doesn't rewrite a pack you already sent, plus a revocable public link that needs no login.
• Brand Facts give you a correction loop. Claims the engines make about you are extracted and you mark each correct or incorrect, with a correction where it's wrong. Reviewed facts become the reviewed source of truth that later analysis and agent work lean on.
• Enterprise is reachable. Business includes the Answyn MCP in Claude and ChatGPT, and Custom plans add the full API surface, white-label reports, SSO, a data processing agreement, service level agreement options, unlimited history and native-language markets.
• Billing is account-level. One subscription covers every brand inside the cap, so a two-brand SME on Pro or a ten-brand agency on Business doesn't buy a second subscription. That's £34.90 per brand per month at the Business tier.

Where it falls short: we'd rather you read this here than find it in week two.

• Four published engines, with Microsoft Copilot, Perplexity, and Claude on Custom, not nine. Profound reaches up to nine at Enterprise, adding Grok and DeepSeek. Answyn covers the consumer surfaces with meaningful UK usage rather than counting model APIs.
• No published SOC 2 certification. Profound holds SOC 2 Type II and publishes a 99.9% uptime service level agreement. Answyn offers DPA and SLA options on Custom plans, negotiated rather than published.
• Pro and Business cover the United Kingdom only. Multiple markets, and native-language tracking beyond English, are a Custom conversation.
• No free tier. Unpaid accounts sit on a reduced internal floor. Pro and Business include a 7-day free trial. A card is required.

Verdict: if you're a UK business between roughly £1m and £100m in revenue, or an agency running up to ten client brands, Answyn is the most complete AEO system in this guide for the money, and the only one that follows a single loop from measurement through journey diagnosis and prioritised actions to a brief a writer can work from and a report a board will accept. If you need nine engines across six markets with SOC 2 evidence attached to the purchase order, buy Profound.

Profound is the best-funded and most enterprise-ready platform in the category, valued at $1bn after a $96m Series C in February 2026, with more than 700 enterprise customers including over 10% of the Fortune 500 by its own account. It reaches up to nine answer engines, holds SOC 2 Type II, publishes a 99.9% service level agreement, and is the only platform here with licensed consumer prompt-volume panel data covering the UK.

Website: tryprofound.com · Pricing: tryprofound.com/pricing · UK entity: Cooper Square Technologies UK Ltd, company 16986727, London

What it does well:

• Genuine enterprise credentials. SOC 2 Type II, a published service level agreement at 99.9% monthly uptime with tiered service credits, a published data processing agreement, SAML and OIDC single sign-on, six granular roles, and dedicated Slack support with a 24-hour response commitment. Nobody else in this guide publishes all of that.
• Prompt Volumes is a category-unique dataset. Licensed double opt-in consumer panels covering hundreds of millions of prompts a month across ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude and Perplexity, with a rolling weekly refresh and explicit UK coverage. This tells you what people are actually asking, rather than what you guessed they might ask, and no other platform in this guide has an equivalent.
• Widest engine roster. Up to nine surfaces including Google AI Mode, Gemini, Copilot, Grok, DeepSeek and Claude, plus ChatGPT Shopping and OpenAI Ads reporting.
• Deep agent analytics. Server-log based rather than JavaScript tag based, with crawler verification against spoofing and connectors for CloudFront, Cloudflare, Fastly, Netlify, Akamai, Google Cloud CDN and Vercel, plus Adobe Analytics and GA4 extensions.
• A mature API and MCP surface. REST v2 with Python and JavaScript SDKs, a public OpenAPI spec, a Tableau connector and a hosted MCP server. Forty-eight named integrations.
• A real UK presence. A London office, a UK-registered subsidiary incorporated in January 2026, and UK stops on its 2026 event programme.

Where it falls short:

• Both self-serve tiers are locked to one language and one region. For a UK brand that also sells into the US or the EU, that's an immediate push to an unlisted Enterprise contract.
• Starter is ChatGPT only, on one seat. At £73 a month that's not a serious evaluation environment.
• Data is hosted in the United States. The privacy policy states the services are hosted in the US and rely on standard contractual clauses for EEA and UK transfers. There's no UK or EU data residency option.
• Only annual billing is shown on the public tiers.
• Price is the most common complaint in its reviews. Against 4.5 out of 5 across roughly 1,100 G2 reviews, recurring dislikes include “the pricing is on the higher side” and “it remains very high, it's one of the most expensive tools on the market”. Enterprise pricing isn't published; the only third-party estimate we found puts it at $2,000 to $5,000 or more per month, which we cite as an estimate rather than a quote.

Verdict: if you're a UK enterprise with a multi-market brand portfolio, a procurement function that requires SOC 2 and a signed SLA, and a budget that starts in five figures a year, Profound is the correct answer and it's not close. For everyone else, the public tiers are narrow enough that the price advantage over a fuller platform disappears on contact with a real prompt set.

Peec AI is a Berlin-based platform with EU data hosting, roughly $29m raised and, by its own account, more than 3,000 brands and agencies on the books. It offers unlimited seats on every tier, which no other vendor here matches, and strong source classification. Its constraint is that every self-serve tier lets you select only three models, and it doesn't generate content briefs.

Website: peec.ai · Pricing: peec.ai/pricing and peec.ai/pricing-agencies · Entity: Peec AI GmbH, Berlin

Its agency tiers don't publish prices and run on a credit model where “1 prompt x 1 model x 1 day = 1 credit”, with a stated minimum of 900 credits per project.

What it does well:

• Unlimited users on every plan, including the £73 entry tier. Profound gives you one seat at a comparable price. For a marketing team of six this alone can decide the purchase.
• EU data residency posture. An EU-domiciled controller, Google Cloud via Google Ireland, PostHog EU Cloud and Stripe Payments Europe. For a UK buyer with a nervous data protection officer this is materially easier than a US-hosted platform.
• Excellent source analysis. Domain and URL level citation tracking with five source classifications, and a genuine distinction between content that was used and content that was cited, plus gap analysis.
• Brand Perception, launched August 2026, scores attribute associations such as “flexible”, “scalable”, “costly” or “outdated”, with false-claim detection and source attribution.
• Strong agency machinery. Isolated per-client workspaces, branded Looker Studio templates with read-only client links, and free pitch workspaces that sit outside client quotas.
• A free, first-party MCP server with read-only tools open by default and write access gated behind owner approval.

Where it falls short:

• Three selectable models on every self-serve tier. The pricing page lists eleven models (ChatGPT, AI Mode, AI Overviews, Copilot, Perplexity, Gemini, Claude Sonnet 4, GPT-5 Search, DeepSeek, Qwen and Mistral) and every self-serve tier says “Choose 3 models”. Additional models are a paid add-on, reported at $35 to $165 a month each depending on tier. Claude Sonnet 4 and GPT-5 Search require an Enterprise contract.
• No content brief generation. Peec's Actions page describes the feature as handling “the research, analysis, and prioritization so you know exactly what to build and where to focus”, with step-by-step guidance and a relative opportunity score. That's prioritisation and direction, and it's genuinely useful, but it doesn't hand a writer a brief. If you want the gap turned into a page, that work stays with you.
• No SOC 2 certification and no published SLA. Reported as in progress; there's no security or trust centre page.
• No UK entity. Peec AI GmbH is registered in Berlin, and its second office is in New York.
• A very small review base. 4.8 out of 5, but from 18 G2 reviews against Profound's 1,128.
• Prompt quality needs manual work. A G2 reviewer reports “40% of the prompts were overlapping with each other”.
• No historical backfill. Tracking starts at signup.

Verdict: the best measurement-only platform in Europe, and the right pick for an agency that needs many seats and many client workspaces without per-seat billing. If your team is buying a platform to change outcomes rather than observe them, budget for whatever produces the content, because Peec won't.

Searchable is a London-registered platform that launched in January 2026 and raised $14m at an $85m valuation in May 2026. It tracks eight AI surfaces, and unusually for this category it also generates and publishes content directly to WordPress, Sanity and Contentful. Its weaknesses are gated features and published limits that have moved.

Website: searchable.com · Pricing: searchable.com/pricing · Entity: Searchable Limited, UK company 16579753, London SE1

What it does well:

• Eight AI surfaces on the published plans, covering ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews, Copilot, Gemini, Grok and DeepSeek, with Google AI Mode listed in its documentation as a ninth.
• Content Studio closes the loop. It generates AI-optimised articles and publishes them straight into your CMS, which very few measurement platforms do.
• First-party LLM analytics, in beta, covering AI crawler activity, sitemap coverage, referrals, human visitors arriving from AI assistants and crawl-to-click attribution, with ingestion via WordPress, Next.js middleware, Netlify, Akamai and Google Cloud.
• Native GA4 and Google Search Console integrations on Professional and above, plus Linear, Slack, HubSpot, Salesforce and Webflow.
• A genuinely first-class MCP server with OAuth 2.1 and PKCE, read scope by default, and write tools that require explicit confirmation.
• A UK-registered contracting entity, which makes procurement, DPA and data residency conversations considerably easier than with a Singapore or US vendor.
• 14-day free trial with no card required, the most generous evaluation window in this guide.

Where it falls short:

• The pricing page and the documentation describe two different products. The pricing page sells Professional and Scale at $125 and $400 with 100 and 500 prompts and unlimited projects. The documentation describes Starter, Professional and Agency at $100, $300 and $750, with 1, 2 and 5 tracked domains and 50, 100 and 1,000 prompts. We couldn't reconcile them. Get your tier, your domain count and your prompt allowance in writing before you pay.
• Claude appears to be gated. The pricing page lists all eight engines on all plans, while the documentation says Claude is “available on custom plans” and G2 reviewers report Claude and Gemini requiring add-on fees on Professional. This is an unresolved contradiction. Ask before you sign.
• Multi-country tracking is Scale-tier only, and API access is Scale-tier only.
• History is capped, at three months on Starter, twelve on Professional and unlimited on Agency and Custom per its documentation, and G2 reviewers report historical data occasionally disappearing.
• No Looker Studio or BigQuery connector.

Verdict: the strongest choice if you want measurement and content production from the same vendor, and you're comfortable with a platform that launched in January 2026 and whose pricing page and documentation currently describe different tiers. The UK entity is a real procurement advantage. The contradictions are a real diligence task.

Semrush, acquired by Adobe for around $1.9bn in a deal completed on 28 April 2026, sells AI visibility as a $99-a-month per-domain toolkit and as an unlimited Enterprise AIO tier. Its distinguishing strength is market coverage: 117 regional databases and more than 68,000 location and language combinations. Its distinguishing weakness is that it doesn't query the engines at all.

Website: semrush.com · Pricing: semrush.com/pricing/ai and semrush.com/pricing/enterprise

What it does well:

• Unmatched geographic granularity. 117 regional databases, more than 68,000 location and language combinations in Brand Performance, and prompt tracking across 220 or more countries and territories, per its documentation.
• It sits inside the tools you already use. GA4, Google Search Console, Looker Studio, Google Sheets, WordPress and Zapier integrations, plus MCP access from the Starter plan upwards.
• Sentiment and recommendations are included, along with AI-cited media analysis and an AI-readiness site audit.
• White-label reporting at $20 a month for branded reports.
• UK VAT is handled properly. Semrush explicitly collects 20% UK VAT and removes it against a valid GB VAT number.
• Marginal cost is near zero if you already subscribe. For an existing Semrush customer this is the cheapest credible way to start.

Where it falls short:

• It doesn't query the engines on your behalf. Semrush builds AI visibility from clickstream data and its keyword dataset, covering 317m or more prompts and responses, and its knowledge base states that “prompt responses are captured from real requests and not via any APIs of LLMs”, that “no platform can provide exact numbers on visibility”, and that its metrics are “reliable directional signals”. It does track 25 custom prompts with daily rankings. That's an honest disclosure and a real methodological limit: for most of the dataset you're reading other people's sessions, not a record of what the engines said to your prompt set.
• Twenty-five tracked prompts at the base tier, with more at $60 per 50, and each additional domain at $99. For an agency this scales badly.
• Brand Performance refreshes weekly, not daily.
• Claude and Grok appear only in Enterprise AIO marketing, not in the documented data sources for the $99 toolkit.
• Reported volatility. Independent reviewers describe local market share data “swinging from 100% to 0% in weeks” and recommendations that read as generic.

Verdict: if Semrush is already on your invoice, add the toolkit today; the marginal cost is trivial and the market coverage is the best in the guide. If it's not, think hard before buying the whole platform for the AI module, because for most of the dataset the clickstream method means you're buying an estimate rather than a record of your own prompt set.

Similarweb is an NYSE-listed company with offices including London, and the only product here that measures actual AI referral traffic at panel scale rather than sampling prompts. If your board question is “did AI send us buyers”, this is the tool that answers it.

Website: aisearch.similarweb.com · Pricing: similarweb.com/corp/pricing

• AI Search Intelligence from $99/month (~£73), or roughly $399 (~£293) bundled with Competitive Intelligence, SEO and AEO. Enterprise is sales-led.
• Two modules. AI Brand Visibility covers brand versus competitor tracking, prompt tracking against real user questions, citation analysis and sentiment. AI Traffic measures which large language models sent visits to your site and which prompts drove them.
• Six surfaces: ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Google AI Mode, Grok and DeepSeek. Claude isn't among them, which is worth knowing if Claude matters to your category.
• A London office alongside New York and Givatayim, and a public-company reporting perimeter, which gives UK enterprise buyers an established contracting route. Note that the group is headquartered in Israel, not the UK.

Where it falls short: prompt-level visibility is shallower than the pure-play platforms, and the clickstream panel methodology has known coverage gaps for low-volume B2B queries, which is precisely where most UK B2B brands live. It's a traffic-measurement product with visibility features, not the reverse.

Verdict: buy it alongside a prompt-tracking platform, not instead of one. It's the strongest available answer to the ROI question that every other tool in this category structurally can't answer, and that alone earns it a place on an enterprise shortlist.

Ahrefs Brand Radar is a research index rather than an optimisation workflow. Its product page claims more than 473 million monthly prompts derived from real search demand rather than synthetic prompt lists, which makes it excellent for discovering what to track. It refreshes four of its seven AI surfaces monthly, appears to have no sentiment analysis and has no AI crawler analytics.

Website: ahrefs.com/brand-radar · Methodology: ahrefs.com/blog/brand-radar-methodology

One check is one prompt on one model in one location. Base plans include 150, 300 and 600 checks a month on Lite, Standard and Advanced.

What it does well:

• Search-backed prompts. Prompts come from Google People Also Ask and a 110-billion-keyword database rather than being invented, which is a genuinely different and defensible sourcing method.
• Volume. Its methodology page breaks the index down as 282m monthly AI Overviews queries, 24m AI Mode, and roughly 13m to 15m each for Perplexity, Gemini, ChatGPT, Copilot and Grok. Note that this breakdown totals materially less than the “473M+” on the product page, and Ahrefs doesn't explain the gap.
• Honest self-labelling. Ahrefs states plainly that its metrics are “directional indicators, not exact traffic counts”, and publishes its full methodology. Very few vendors do either.
• Query fan-out reporting, a free Brand Radar prompts API endpoint that consumes no API units, and an official MCP server.
• UK VAT is charged and refundable against a valid tax ID.

Where it falls short:

• Monthly refresh on ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini and Copilot. Only AI Overviews and AI Mode are continuous. In a channel where answers vary run to run, monthly isn't a monitoring cadence.
• No sentiment analysis that we could find. There's no reference to it on the Brand Radar product page, the methodology page or the six-article help collection.
• No AI crawler or agent analytics, and no GA4 attribution. You can't connect a mention to a session.
• No recommendations, actions or content briefs. Briefs live in a separate $99-a-month product.
• You need a base subscription on top of the add-on. Realistic all-in cost is roughly £241 at the cheapest useful combination and £609 for the full index.
• Coverage skews English, proportional to the keyword database. Ahrefs states its coverage is strongest in English and that it doesn't estimate AI adoption by country.

Verdict: the best prompt-discovery instrument in the category, and a poor monitoring platform. Several sophisticated teams run Brand Radar to decide what to track and a daily-collection platform to actually track it. If you can only buy one, buy the one that refreshes daily.

Otterly.ai is an Austrian GmbH, a 2025 Gartner Cool Vendor for AI in Marketing, and the cheapest credible way into daily AI visibility tracking at $29 a month. It's an EU legal entity with an EU commercial register entry, which matters to UK data protection officers. The catch is that only four engines are included and the rest are paid add-ons.

Website: otterly.ai · Pricing: otterly.ai/pricing · Entity: OtterlyAI GmbH, Persenbeug, Austria

Strengths: daily tracking on every tier including Lite. Unlimited team members on every tier. API and MCP access, agent analytics covering 200,000 to 1,000,000 events a month, GEO URL audits, a Looker Studio connector and ChatGPT ads tracking. SSO, a dedicated customer success manager and quarterly GEO health checks on Enterprise. Around 40,000 marketing professionals on the platform by its own account. Six free ungated tools, which is more than most vendors here offer.

Weaknesses: only ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, Perplexity and Copilot are included; Google AI Mode, Gemini and Claude are paid add-ons, reported at $9 to $439 a month, so the real cost inflates well beyond the headline. Reviewers report that “it's not always clear what specific actions should be taken based on findings”. No UK entity.

Verdict: the right first purchase for a UK SME that wants to establish a baseline for under £150 a month with EU incorporation behind it. Model the add-on cost for AI Mode and Gemini before you compare it to anything, because those two surfaces matter in the UK.

Conductor is a twenty-year-old enterprise search platform that acquired Searchmetrics in 2023, bringing a Berlin office, more than 500 mostly European customers and over a decade of European data indexes. It prices on usage rather than seats, and it's the only platform we found that separates ChatGPT “Auto” mode from ChatGPT “Search” mode.

Website: conductor.com · Pricing: conductor.com/pricing, not published

Strengths: its homepage claims visibility across ChatGPT, Gemini, Copilot, Claude and traditional search, with Perplexity also referenced, so the roster differs from most rivals in including Claude. Usage-based rather than per-seat pricing, so large teams aren't penalised. Tier allowances scale from 1,000 pages and 500 keywords at Essentials to 125,000 pages and 60,000 keywords at Enterprise. Enterprise security and governance are front and centre, and a German-language interface is available. It's also the only platform we found that separates ChatGPT's Auto mode from its Search mode, a real methodological refinement.

Weaknesses: pricing is entirely opaque and sales-led, with the long cycle that implies. It's an SEO suite with AEO features rather than an AEO-first product, so if AI search is your primary concern you're paying for a lot of adjacent capability. No UK entity.

Verdict: the safe institutional choice for a UK enterprise that already runs an enterprise SEO platform and wants AEO inside the same governance perimeter, with European data heritage attached. Budget for a procurement cycle measured in months.

Authoritas, trading as Analytics SEO Limited, is the only genuinely UK-headquartered enterprise platform in this guide besides Answyn and Searchable. It uses a hybrid method, querying both direct model APIs and crawling the user-facing interfaces, and it offers refresh cadences from hourly to monthly. Its problem is that it publishes no pricing at all.

Website: authoritas.com · AI product: LLM brand visibility tracking

Strengths: coverage across Google AI Overviews, Bing Copilot, SearchGPT, ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude and Perplexity. Hourly refresh is available, faster than anything else here. Three production APIs (SERPs, Platform, and Content and Page Structure). Business intelligence connectors for Looker Studio, Power BI and Tableau. Branded versus unbranded query separation, sentiment and reputation analysis, and multi-language question generation. A free tier of 100 questions against one model. UK support hours and a long-standing UK enterprise and ecommerce client base.

Weaknesses: a small team by its own description, against rivals that have raised tens of millions. No published pricing anywhere on the site, which makes even preliminary evaluation awkward, and no self-serve route.

Verdict: worth a conversation if UK domicile and UK data handling are hard requirements and you want a vendor with a decade of search data behind it. Ask for pricing in the first email, because you'll not find it any other way.

The category now holds more than thirty tracking tools with over $200m of venture funding between them, which means a top ten is a filter, not a census. These came close.

Also excluded: PromptWatch and AI Clicks didn't clear our inclusion threshold of a published pricing page, a documented methodology and independently verifiable scale. Goodie AI is excluded because we couldn't confirm an operating product: its domain, goodie.ai, is currently listed for sale at $150,000.

Pick by the shape of your business, not by the size of the feature list.

Ten questions, in the order we would ask them. The first four filter out most of the market.

1. Do you query the live consumer product, or a model API, or a clickstream panel? These are three different products sold under one name. A model API isn't what your buyer uses. A clickstream panel is a model of what engines say, not a record of what they said.
2. How many times do you run each prompt before you report a number, and do you publish a confidence interval? In one study of 2,961 prompt runs there was less than a one-in-a-hundred chance that repeated runs returned an identical brand list, and less than one in a thousand that the list appeared in the same order (SparkToro, January 2026). A single-run score is noise presented as a measurement.
3. Can I click any headline number and see the exact answers behind it? If not, you're buying an opinion.
4. Show me a fix your platform generated, and the measured result thirty days later. Ask for this on the call, not afterwards.
5. Where does your prompt-volume or panel data come from, and can you name the chain? This is the question the category doesn't want to answer. In December 2025, Koi Security documented a family of browser extensions with over 8 million combined users intercepting every prompt and response across ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Copilot, Perplexity, DeepSeek, Grok and Meta AI, and passing them to a data broker. In March 2026, The Register reported that a researcher made 205 queries against an unnamed venture-backed generative engine optimisation platform and retrieved roughly 490 prompts from more than 435 unique users across twenty sensitive categories, including medical records, mental health disclosures and immigration status. The platform wasn't named. Under UK GDPR, ingesting special category data through a broker chain you can't document is your exposure as controller, not your vendor's. Get the provenance chain in writing, and get it covered by the DPA.
6. Which market and language does my subscription track by default, and what does a second market cost? Several platforms lock self-serve tiers to one region and one language, which is a genuine trap for a UK brand that also sells into the US or the EU.
7. What is the total monthly cost, including add-on engines, per-domain fees and extra seats? Headline tiers in this category routinely understate the real bill by a third or more.
8. Are API, single sign-on and data export gated to a higher tier? They almost always are, and that gate is usually where the price jumps.
9. What happens to my historical data if I downgrade or leave? History caps of three to twelve months are standard, and some buyers report data disappearing.
10. What is the shortest contract you'll accept? With the CMA's remedies on Google due by around March 2027, twelve months is prudent and thirty-six isn't.

Every price in this guide was read from the vendor's own published pricing page on 22 August 2026, not from a third-party aggregator. Where a vendor doesn't publish pricing, we say “not publicly listed” rather than estimating, and where we cite a third-party estimate we label it as an estimate. Currency conversions use £1 = $1.36 and £1 = €1.17, the spot rates on 22 August 2026, and they will drift.

Five claims we couldn't verify, stated plainly because a guide that hides its gaps isn't worth citing:

• There's no independent vendor-by-vendor comparison of EU or UK data residency in this category. We looked. It doesn't exist, which is why question five in the vendor list above matters so much.
• Searchable's pricing page and its documentation describe different tiers, prices, domain limits and prompt allowances. We've reported the contradiction rather than picking a side, and we've used the page a buyer actually transacts on.
• Ahrefs' headline prompt count and its own methodology breakdown don't reconcile, by roughly 100 million prompts. Ahrefs doesn't explain the gap and we couldn't.
• Enterprise pricing for Profound, Conductor, BrightEdge, Brandlight and Authoritas isn't published anywhere we could verify. The only figures in circulation are third-party estimates, and we've not repeated them as though they were quotes.
• Several company facts here (funding totals, customer counts, headcounts, office locations) come from vendor announcements and press coverage rather than audited filings. We've said “by its own account” where the vendor is the only source.

Criterion seven above is evidence of scale, and it would be dishonest to score competitors on it without scoring ourselves. Answyn is new. Luto Ventures Ltd, the company behind Answyn, was incorporated on 7 July 2025 and its company number is 16563350. We publish no headcount, no funding round and no customer count, because there's not yet a number worth publishing. We hold no SOC 2 certification. We've no meaningful G2 review base. Profound has raised more than $155m and holds 1,128 G2 reviews; Peec AI has raised roughly $29m. On evidence of scale we score below both, and that's the 5% of the weighting where we lose.

What we'll not do is hide it, because a buyer's guide that only discloses other people's weaknesses is an advertisement wearing a lab coat.

This page is reviewed and re-verified quarterly. If you find a figure that has moved, or one we've got wrong, tell us at team@answyn.com and we'll correct it and date the correction.