Profound vs Peec AI: pricing, scope and AI visibility

The first mistake in a Profound-versus-Peec AI comparison is buying Peec AI's 50-prompt Starter tier, assuming it covers your buyer questions, then discovering at month three that half the real questions were never tracked. You have to explain the gap at renewal, alongside the subscription cost and the missing evidence.

Profound and Peec AI serve different buying shapes. Profound now lists no self-serve price for brands: a free 7-day trial, then a custom Enterprise plan. Its published prices, $99 a month plus $399 a month per client workspace, are for agencies. The plan limits are broken down in Profound pricing. Peec AI lists Starter, Pro and Advanced at €85, €205 and €425 a month billed monthly, or €70, €180 and €360 a month billed annually, plus a custom Enterprise plan. Peec AI pricing, explained covers what each Peec plan includes. Both pages were checked on 2 Oct 2026. The result is a comparison of workload and disclosure, not price alone.

Published prices

Profound's pricing page no longer gives brands a self-serve price. On 2 Oct 2026 it listed a free Trial, with 50 prompts run daily for 7 days on ChatGPT, Gemini and Google AI Overviews and limited AI Marketer credits, and Enterprise as custom, with tailored packages, a tailored prompt tracking plan and up to 9 answer engines tracked. The published prices sit on its agency tab: Agency Growth at $99 a month plus add-ons, with each full client workspace (100 prompts a day on ChatGPT, Perplexity and Google AI Overviews, and 400 Agent credits a month) at $399 a month. Profound says credits are the unit of Agent usage, and each Agent run consumes credits relative to its complexity.

Peec AI now shows its prices once the page's scripts run. On 2 Oct 2026, Starter was €85, Pro €205 and Advanced €425 a month billed monthly, or €70, €180 and €360 a month billed annually; Enterprise is custom, on annual terms. Starter is for SEO and content managers, Pro is for SEO teams, Advanced is for marketing teams managing multiple projects, and Enterprise is for global brands needing custom coverage, integrations and dedicated support. Its public pricing text says pricing is based on tracked prompts and models analyzed.

The split has reversed since this comparison was first written. Peec now publishes a full price ladder for brands, in euros. Profound publishes prices for agencies only, and sends brands from a free trial to a custom quote.

Peec's finer ladder matters here. Pro and Advanced are separate buying points, not one vague middle tier.

Workload units

Profound's public plan details point to prompts, answer engines and credits. The free Trial runs 50 prompts daily for 7 days on 3 engines, with no exports, API or history. An agency client workspace tracks 100 prompts a day on 3 engines with 400 Agent credits a month. Enterprise lists a tailored prompt tracking plan, up to 9 answer engines, exports, API and SSO. For a brand, that makes the trial the evaluation step and Enterprise the only paid plan, so the sales conversation comes early, before any scope or price is fixed.

Peec's ladder uses prompts, models, projects and tracking frequency. Starter lists 50 prompts, 3 chosen models, unlimited users, daily tracking and 1 project. Pro lists 150 prompts and 2 projects. Advanced lists 350 prompts, 5 projects, multi-country support and Looker Studio integration. Enterprise offers fully custom prompt tracking, all models, daily or weekly frequency, unlimited projects, API access and SSO. Peec also says its monthly AI answers figure is calculated by multiplying tracked prompts by active models and tracking frequency, and that pricing is based on the number of tracked prompts and models analyzed.

The practical difference is what you count first. For Profound, count prompts, engines and credits, then ask what an enterprise package adds. For Peec, count prompts, models and frequency, then read the price of the tier that covers them. A team that wants a published brand price to budget with will find one on Peec's page; Profound gives brands a trial, then a quote. A team managing several projects or countries may care more about Peec's project and reporting structure.

The unit decides the shortlist.

The figure shows how often each product was named in our sampled category answers. Peec AI was named in 53% of answers and Profound in 48%, but those are category visibility figures, not product quality scores or proof that one plan fits your team. The sample contained 80 answers to 10 buyer questions across 4 engines, so the intervals matter: Peec AI was between 42% and 63%, while Profound was between 37% and 58%.

Enterprise boundaries

Enterprise is where the public comparison becomes incomplete. Profound describes Enterprise as being for large companies and agencies building and orchestrating AEO marketing campaigns. Its public feature list includes tailored prompt tracking, API and SSO at that level. Peec describes Enterprise as a custom plan for global brands needing custom coverage, integrations and dedicated support, with custom prompt setup, all models, API access and SSO.

Those descriptions show the direction of travel, not the final scope. Neither page gives a like-for-like definition of coverage, support or implementation effort, so the buyer still needs a workload-specific conversation.

Profound's page no longer sets a headcount boundary. Both its Trial and Enterprise include unlimited seats, and it says to choose Enterprise for ongoing daily tracking, more answer engines, tailored prompt and Agent usage, and dedicated support. It does not say how much of each a tailored package includes, so the custom scope still has to come from the quote.

Peec's boundary is also about scope rather than team size. Unlimited projects, all models, custom prompt setup and API access appear under Enterprise. For a global brand, that may be the relevant distinction. For a mid-market team with one project, it may be unnecessary complexity.

Run this check before a sales call. It takes less than an hour.

1. Write down the number of projects you need now, then the number you expect to monitor.
2. Count the prompts that represent real buyer questions, rather than padding the list with near duplicates.
3. Mark the engines or models you need, and whether tracking must run daily.
4. Ask both vendors for the monthly price at that exact workload, including API, SSO and support if relevant.
5. Compare Profound's quote with Peec's published tier at the same workload, and record which inputs produced each figure.

This procedure exposes the variables that make the two plans hard to compare. It also prevents a plan comparison based on different units, which is a durable way to buy the wrong dashboard.

Category evidence

The AI search visibility leaderboard gives a separate answer to how each product is named by AI engines in its category. The source pattern shows a citation-rate contrast: Peec AI's own site was cited in 18% of sampled answers, while Profound's own site was cited in 20%, as the figure showed for their naming rates. Peec AI's AI instructions page was cited most often for Peec, while Profound's Answer Engine Insights overview was cited most often for Profound.

Being named and being cited are different outcomes. A product can be named without its own page supplying the evidence, and a cited page can appear without deciding which tool is suitable for your workload.

The weekly research is useful context, but this sample does not settle a purchase. An enterprise buyer may care about category presence across models, regions and teams, then need API or SSO to move findings into a wider process. A mid-market buyer may need a smaller set of prompts run consistently, with enough evidence to decide which page to fix next.

A cheaper plan can still be a poor fit if its units do not cover the questions you need answered. A custom plan can still be a poor fit if its quote hides the work behind a broad scope statement.

The caveat that matters most is sample size. We measure samples, print intervals and do not know what we have not measured. The leaderboard shows how Peec AI and Profound were named in 80 sampled answers across 4 engines, not how either product will perform for your prompts, market, account or contract.

If neither fits, see Best Profound alternatives for GEO and Peec AI alternatives.