AI visibility platforms for agencies running many brands
An agency buys a different product from the one a brand buys, even when the logo on the invoice is the same. Isolation between client workspaces, billing that maps to a client, access for more than one person, and reporting that can go out under an agency name all matter more than the depth of any single figure. AirOps, GetXEO and Writesonic are built around that shape, and the second of those is ours. Most of this field is not.
We publish this page and rank GetXEO second on it, on the criterion this page states before the table: how well a platform handles many client brands at once. Weight published cost per client instead and we are last of the seven platforms here that publish a price. The two limits that matter most to an agency, a single user workspace today and an agency price that is quoted rather than published, are stated in our own entry and repeated under the closing table. Vendor figures were read on the vendor pages, ours on 31 August 2026 and the rest on 29 August 2026.
In short
The questions this page answers, and the short answers.
- Which AI visibility platforms suit agencies running many brands?
- AirOps leads because multi brand production is the design rather than a plan row. GetXEO is second and is ours, running one isolated workspace per client brand with a plan attached to each. Writesonic is third and publishes agency pricing separately. Ahrefs and Semrush suit agencies that already own the suite. The rest are excellent single brand products that an agency has to work around.
- What does an agency need from an AI visibility platform?
- Four things a brand never asks for. Isolation, so competing clients never share data. Billing that maps to a client rather than to an account. Access for the several people who touch an account. And reporting that leaves the tool under the agency name rather than as a screenshot of a dashboard belonging to somebody else.
- How is agency pricing structured on AI visibility platforms?
- Three ways. A separate agency price card, which Writesonic publishes. A plan attached to each workspace, which is the GetXEO model, with the agency version quoted on contact. Or no agency structure at all, which is most of the field, where an agency buys one plan per client at retail.
- What do AI visibility platforms make an agency do by hand?
- Client reporting, nearly everywhere. Very few products in this category export something an agency can put its own name on, so a monthly client update usually gets rebuilt in slides. That work scales with the client count, which is the cost an agency feels every month rather than at renewal.
What changes when one team watches many brands
Four constraints a single brand team never meets.
Everything on a feature comparison stays true when an agency buys it. Four more constraints simply arrive on top, and none of them appear on a pricing page.
- Isolation. Two clients in one category cannot see the data belonging to the other, and the agency has to be able to say so plainly when asked in a pitch
- Billing that maps to a client. An account level subscription has to be split by hand every month, and a plan attached to each client does not
- More than one person. A strategist, an account manager and a writer all touch the same brand, and single user products turn that into a shared login or a bottleneck
- Reporting that leaves the tool. A client update carrying the product name and interface of another company is a monthly reminder that the agency is reselling
Rank this field on those four and the order changes considerably from a ranking built for a single brand. Two products that look ordinary on depth are near the top, and two of the strongest measurement products in the category sit in the lower half.
The ten platforms, ranked for agency work
Every platform with the agency constraint it hits.
Read on the vendor pages, the GetXEO rows on 31 August 2026 and the rest on 29 August 2026.
| Rank | Platform | The agency fit | The constraint |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | AirOps | Built for many brands producing at volume, with integrations into the stack | No published price |
| 2 | GetXEO | One isolated workspace per client, each carrying its own plan | One user today, and no published agency price |
| 3 | Writesonic | Publishes an agency price card separately from the brand one | Engine list opens only at the top tier |
| 4 | Ahrefs Brand Radar | Category level index, which is pitch material as much as reporting | Checks multiply by platform and location |
| 5 | Semrush AI Toolkit | Sits inside a suite most agencies already run | Absent from the cheapest plan |
| 6 | Profound | The most defensible number to put in a client report | Priced per brand, with a narrow entry tier |
| 7 | Peec AI | Priced to add one client brand at a time | Countries capped below the top tier |
| 8 | AthenaHQ | A free tier that makes a pitch demo cheap | A credit meter that moves with configuration |
| 9 | Scrunch AI | Fixes a client site for agents without a rebuild | Sold per site, at two hundred and fifty a month |
| 10 | Conductor | Clears an enterprise client security review | Enterprise shaped, and no published price |
Two of the ten publish no price at all, and one more is ours: GetXEO publishes a single brand figure and quotes the agency structure on contact. For an agency that is worse than it is for a brand, because a quote has to be obtained once per client rather than once, and the timeline for each of those sits with somebody else.
One to three: built for many brands at once
Three products that assume more than one client.
1. AirOps. First because the multi brand case is the design rather than a plan row. The platform is built around workflows that research, produce and publish at volume, and the integration list connects it into the systems content already moves through, which is what stops an agency rebuilding a pipeline per client. The offsite work covers the publishers and roundups an engine reaches for, which is often where a client category is actually decided. No plan figure is published, and independent research on the company is the clearest outside read available.
2. GetXEO. Ours, and second on an architecture that was built for this rather than adapted to it. One workspace holds one tracked brand domain with its own scans, audits, blogs and calendar, a user account can hold as many workspaces as it needs, and no data crosses between them. The isolation point is the one that matters in a pitch, because an agency serving two brands in one category has to be able to answer that question directly. The single brand plan attaches to one workspace, and the agency version is billed at account level and metered per workspace, per hundred questions and per hundred blogs, quoted on contact.
3. Writesonic. Third because it does the one thing nearly nobody here does, which is publish a separate price card for agencies. Agency pricing is published on its own page rather than being quoted on request, so an agency can model a client roster without a call. On the brand side, fifty, three hundred and six hundred answers a day are tracked across the three plans, and the engine list stays at ChatGPT, Gemini and Google AI Overviews until the enterprise tier. The tracking is there to aim the writing, which suits an agency being paid to produce.
Two limits belong here rather than further down. A workspace is single user today, with multi user access on the roadmap and collaboration handled through the PDF reports, which is a real constraint for an agency where three people touch one account. And the agency price is not published, so an agency comparing this field on published figures cannot include us. Both of those are reasons to put another platform on the shortlist beside this one.
Four and five: the breadth an agency already owns
Two suites that arrive with the rest of the stack.
The two platforms here are rarely bought for AI visibility alone, and for an agency that is the point.
4. Ahrefs Brand Radar. The index is the agency asset. It covers AI Overviews, Google AI Mode, Perplexity, Gemini, ChatGPT and Copilot with published monthly prompt volumes, which turns a new business conversation into a category read rather than a promise. Custom prompts add Claude and run daily on every platform selected, from five tracked prompts at the entry tier. The agency tax is the meter: one prompt on one platform in one location counts as one check, so a roster of clients across several markets multiplies quickly.
5. Semrush AI Toolkit. Chosen because it is already installed. Visibility and sentiment across many locations sit beside prompt research and an AI ready site audit, in the suite an agency team is already reporting rankings from, which removes both a procurement conversation and a training one. The cheapest plan carries no AI visibility, and the toolkit is also sold separately at ninety nine dollars a month with twenty five tracked prompts, which is the cleaner way for an agency to add it per client.
Neither of these will produce the deepest number in the category. Both will produce a number this month, in a tool the team already knows, which for an agency starting three clients at once is frequently the better trade.
Six to ten: strong products with an agency tax
Five products an agency has to work around.
Nothing in this group is weak. Each one simply charges an agency something extra, in money or in effort, that a single brand never pays.
6. Profound. The most defensible figure in the category, and it costs the most to defend across a roster. A hundred prompts and about nine thousand responses a month on the main paid plan, at daily frequency on every tier, with the entry plan watching ChatGPT alone. For a client whose report will be challenged, this is the right purchase. For twelve clients it is twelve purchases at a tier above the entry one.
7. Peec AI. Priced to add one client at a time, with a ceiling that arrives early. Plans run eighty, two hundred and five and four hundred and twenty dollars a month on annual billing, with three models included per plan and countries capped at one to three below enterprise. A roster of single market clients fits comfortably. A roster with three international clients does not, and the fix is a tier change per client rather than a single account upgrade.
8. AthenaHQ. Useful before a client signs. A free tier carries three hundred credits, which is enough to build a real read for a pitch without a purchase order. One credit is one AI response, heavier models cost five and fan out multiplies every prompt by four, so the same generosity that makes a pitch cheap makes a live client account hard to forecast.
9. Scrunch AI. Solves a specific client problem completely. It serves AI agents a clean server rendered document at the CDN, and Site Diagnostics records what an agent actually received on its last crawl. For an agency, that is a per site deployment on a client property rather than a reporting subscription, at two hundred and fifty dollars a month, and it needs client engineering agreement before it starts.
10. Conductor. Last for an agency and near the top for one kind of client. Mentions and citations sit beside audience, intent, sentiment and competitive market share, and the compliance posture covers SOC 2, ISO 27001 and ISO 42001, which is what clears a large client security review. No price is published, and the shape of the product assumes an in house team rather than an agency running twelve accounts.
What all ten leave for the agency to do
The work no platform in this field removes.
Three jobs survive every purchase on this list, and together they are usually larger than the subscription.
The client report. Almost nothing here exports something an agency can put its own name on, so the monthly update gets rebuilt by hand. That work scales with the client count and is felt every month rather than at renewal. It is the single strongest argument for choosing a tool the team already knows over the tool with the best number.
The explanation. Every platform reports that a figure moved. None says why, and a client will ask. Engines change retrieval on their own schedule and move every brand in a category at once, and answers vary between runs of the same prompt underneath that, so a confident answer needs competitors tracked in the same window and the configuration date to hand.
The work that changes the number. Tracking records an outcome. Research on AI search citation factors describes what earns a citation, and that happens in the questions a brand answers and the form those answers take. We sell into that part, so the useful version is stated as a limit rather than a pitch: no product on this page, ours included, converts a visibility figure into the next thing to publish.
Which to shortlist for which agency
Five agency shapes, matched to a starting point.
Agencies differ more than brands do, and the right first purchase follows the shape of the roster.
| The agency | Start with | Because |
|---|---|---|
| Paid to produce content at volume | AirOps | Production and tracking in one pipeline |
| Needs to model a roster before buying | Writesonic | Agency pricing is published openly |
| Serves competing brands in one category | GetXEO | Isolated workspaces with no data crossover |
| Wins new business on category reads | Ahrefs | An index across six AI surfaces |
| Already reports from one suite | Semrush | No new procurement or training |
One row deserves its caveat repeated rather than left in the table. An agency choosing us for the isolation gets a single user workspace today, which means one login per client account until multi user access ships. An agency with three people on every account should weigh that against the isolation before it decides, and should ask us for the agency quote early, because it is not on the page.
Frequently asked questions
Longer tail questions that did not need a section of their own.
How long does onboarding a client take on an AI visibility platform?
Plan on a working day for the first one and an hour or two after that. The time goes into writing a prompt set that matches how buyers in that category actually ask, and into naming the competitors to track beside it. Both are judgments, and both decide whether the figures mean anything three months later.
How do agencies keep competing brands separate in one AI visibility account?
Through workspace isolation, where each client brand has its own scans, competitors and content with no data crossing between them. GetXEO publishes that model explicitly and names it as what keeps competitive intelligence honest. Platforms without it leave an agency managing separation through separate accounts and separate logins.
Is a free AI visibility tier useful for agency new business?
Yes, for the pitch rather than for the work. A free tier lets an agency build a real category read before a client signs anything, which is more persuasive than a capability slide. AthenaHQ publishes three hundred credits at no cost, which is enough for a genuine read on a small prompt set.
What should an agency ask an AI visibility vendor that a brand would not?
Four things: whether client data is isolated and how that is enforced, whether billing can be attached to a client rather than an account, how many people can access one client context, and what a client facing export actually looks like. None of the four appears on a standard pricing page.
Sources
The 26 records behind every external claim on this page.
All were published or last updated within the past twelve months. A competitor page appears only as a record of that vendor’s own published terms.
- Sacra, the independent research profile of AirOps, revenue, product layers and funding
- Gond and others at Microsoft Research, enabling determinism in LLM inference, January 2026
- Machine Relations, AI search citation factors research
- AirOps, the published platform page, read 29 August 2026
- AirOps, the published integrations page, read 29 August 2026
- AirOps, the published offsite solution page, read 29 August 2026
- AirOps, the published pricing page and plan comparison, read 29 August 2026
- Writesonic, the published agency pricing page, read 29 August 2026
- Writesonic, the published pricing page and plan comparison, read 29 August 2026
- GetXEO, the published workspaces feature page and its FAQ, read 31 August 2026
- GetXEO, the published pricing page, the three plans and the pricing FAQ, read 31 August 2026
- Ahrefs, the published Brand Radar page, read 29 August 2026
- Ahrefs, the published Custom Prompts page and plan quotas, read 29 August 2026
- Semrush, the published AI visibility feature list, read 29 August 2026
- Semrush, the published pricing page and plan comparison, read 29 August 2026
- Semrush, the published AI Visibility Toolkit knowledge base entry, read 29 August 2026
- Profound, the published pricing page and plan comparison, read 29 August 2026
- Peec AI, the published pricing page and plan comparison, read in a browser 29 August 2026
- AthenaHQ, the published plans and pricing comparison, read 29 August 2026
- AthenaHQ, the published credit calculator, read 29 August 2026
- Scrunch AI, the published Agent Experience Platform page, read 29 August 2026
- Scrunch AI, the published Site Diagnostics page, read 29 August 2026
- Scrunch AI, the published pricing page, read in a browser 29 August 2026
- Conductor, the published AI Search Performance page and FAQ, read 29 August 2026
- Conductor, the published enterprise and compliance page, read 29 August 2026
- Conductor, the published pricing and plan comparison, read 29 August 2026
Read next
The rest of this cluster, in the order it makes sense to read.