Profound vs Peec AI vs AirOps: how the leading AEO tools compare
Profound, Peec AI and AirOps get compared constantly and overlap less than the category suggests. Profound is the measurement platform, with the deepest published sampling of the three. Peec AI is the clean daily number, priced and scoped for a team that already writes. AirOps is a content production system that measures in order to aim. Choosing between them is mostly a question of which of those three you are missing.
We publish this page and compete with all three products on it. GetXEO is not one of them. Figures were read on the vendor pages on 29 August 2026.
In short
The questions this page answers, and the short answers.
- What is the difference between Profound, Peec AI and AirOps?
- Profound measures answer engines deeply and runs agents that act on findings. Peec AI reports a daily visibility number with the sources behind it and writes nothing. AirOps produces content at scale, publishes it into your own system, and works offsite as well as on.
- Which of Profound, Peec AI and AirOps publishes its pricing?
- Profound and Peec AI both publish plan prices. AirOps publishes none for any self serve plan, showing feature lists and a start free call to action instead, with a per task overage figure as the only dollar figure on the page.
- Which tool has the deepest sampling of AI answers?
- Profound. Its main paid plan tracks one hundred prompts and analyzes nine thousand responses a month, which works out at ninety checks per prompt. Peec AI runs each prompt once every twenty four hours on each selected model. AirOps publishes a daily answer frequency.
- Does Peec AI produce content?
- No. Peec AI scores visibility, position inside the answer and sentiment, and separates sources it used from sources it cited. Its recommendations point at work to do elsewhere, including off site placements. Writing and publishing sit outside the product entirely.
- Which AI engines do Profound, Peec AI and AirOps cover?
- Profound covers ChatGPT alone at entry, three on its main paid plan and up to nine at enterprise. Peec AI includes three models chosen from six, with more sold as add ons. AirOps shows ChatGPT at entry and four engines above it.
Three products, three different problems
What each tool is actually built to solve, briefly.
These three appear on the same shortlists and are not really substitutes for one another.
| Tool | The problem it solves | Writes |
|---|---|---|
| Profound | Measuring AI answers deeply, then acting through agents | Yes |
| Peec AI | A clean daily number with the citation record behind it | No |
| AirOps | Producing and publishing content at scale, onsite and off | Yes |
A team can run all three without redundancy, which is the clearest sign they are not competitors in the ordinary sense. What they share is a category label and a dashboard.
How each one measures
Sampling depth, engine coverage and what gets recorded.
Measurement quality is the row buyers underweight, because a number built on one check is a sample rather than a fact. The same prompt can return different answers on different runs.
Profound. The main paid plan tracks a hundred prompts and analyzes nine thousand responses a month, at daily frequency, with the entry plan covering ChatGPT alone and enterprise reaching nine answer engines. That is ninety checks per prompt and the deepest published figure of the three. It reports citations, sentiment, ranking and competitive position, and publishes what people actually ask answer engines.
Peec AI. It scores visibility, the position a brand lands at inside an answer, and sentiment, and separates sources it used from sources it cited. Each prompt runs once every twenty four hours on every selected model, with three models included per plan and countries capped at one to three below enterprise. Shallower than Profound and much clearer to read.
AirOps. Tracked prompts run at one hundred and two hundred and fifty on its two self serve plans, with a daily answer frequency and pages monitored alongside. Measurement here exists to aim production rather than to stand alone as a report.
How each one acts on a finding
The gap between a recommendation and a published page.
This is where the three separate hardest, and where a buyer most often assumes wrongly.
AirOps produces the most. Its agent drafts briefs, produces new pages, refreshes existing ones, routes them through review and exports them back to a content system, publish ready. Its offsite product identifies which third party publishers engines cite, then manages outreach, drafting and reporting, which is a surface neither of the others sells.
Profound acts through agents. Agents generate briefs, create assets and publish into an existing content system, with a credit cost per run and an estimate before it. Agent Analytics reports AI crawler and referral traffic from server logs across unlimited domains on every plan.
Peec AI acts by telling you. Its recommendations point at review profiles engines quote and at stories on domains they cite. That is deliberate, and for a team with writers it is enough.
What each one costs, and what the price includes
Two publish plan prices and one publishes none.
Prices below were read on the pricing page each vendor publishes, on 29 August 2026, in a browser where the figures render only in a browser.
| Tool | Published entry | Main paid plan | What the meter counts |
|---|---|---|---|
| Profound | 99 a month, 82.50 annual | 399 a month, 332.50 annual | Prompts, responses, agent credits |
| Peec AI | 80 a month, annual | 205 a month, annual | Prompts, models, projects, countries |
| AirOps | Not published | Not published | Tasks, tracked prompts, pages |
The AirOps pricing page publishes no figure for either self serve plan, showing feature lists and a start free action instead, with a per task overage rate as the only dollar figure on it. That is a legitimate model and it makes a like for like comparison impossible without a call.
Two independent readings are worth having beside the vendor pages. Fortune reported Profound raising ninety six million dollars, and TechCrunch reported Peec crossing ten million dollars in annualized revenue in May 2026. Independent research publishes a profile of the AirOps business where the vendor publishes less.
What none of the three publishes
Two gaps every one of these products shares today.
Two things are missing from all three, and a buyer comparing them will not find either by reading feature pages more carefully.
Which pages should exist together. All three decide what to write about, one topic at a time. None publishes a method for deciding which pages should exist together before any of them are written, so the sequencing and the internal structure remain a judgment the customer makes. That is a real gap in the category rather than a criticism of these three specifically.
Evidence for the results they publish. Each of the three publishes customer outcomes and none publishes the method behind them. Different windows, different baselines, no definitions. Buyers already fact check what AI tells them about vendors, and the same standard is worth applying to a case study page.
Neither gap should stop a purchase. Both are worth knowing before a renewal conversation, when a vendor is asked what changed and everybody reaches for a number that was never defined.
Which one suits which team
Matching each product to the gap it actually closes.
The choice is nearly always decided by what is missing, not by which dashboard is nicest.
| Your situation | Better fit | Because |
|---|---|---|
| You need a defensible number | Profound | Ninety checks per prompt a month |
| Bot traffic is a standing question | Profound | Log based analytics on every plan |
| You already write well | Peec AI | A clean number, nothing you will not use |
| You track several countries | Peec AI | Three per project above the entry plan |
| The pages must get written | AirOps | Drafts published into your own system |
| Earned mentions are the gap | AirOps | Offsite is a first class product |
One caveat applies to all three. Research on citation factors ranks off site brand signals ahead of on page craft, so a tool working only on your own pages is working on one lever among several, however well it does it.
Frequently asked questions
Longer tail questions that did not need a section of their own.
Can a brand run Profound and AirOps together?
Yes, and some do. Profound supplies the measurement and the crawler traffic picture, AirOps supplies production and offsite work. The cost is two contracts and a manual handoff between them, which is the standard trade when neither product covers the other half well.
Is Peec AI too simple for an enterprise brand?
Not necessarily, though the caps matter. Countries per project run from one to three below the enterprise tier, and three models are included per plan. A large brand watching many markets or many models will hit those ceilings before it hits any limitation in the reporting itself.
What does the AirOps pricing page actually show?
Plan features, a start free action and a per task overage rate, with no figure for either self serve tier. Enterprise is described as custom pricing based on use cases and content volume. The vendor gives no reason for withholding the plan figures.
Which of these three covers the most AI engines?
Profound, at its enterprise tier, which reaches nine answer engines. Below that the picture reverses: Profound covers ChatGPT alone at entry, while Peec AI includes three models on every published plan and AirOps shows four engines above its entry tier.
Sources
The 16 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.
- Machine Relations, AI search citation factors research
- Gond and others at Microsoft Research, enabling determinism in LLM inference, January 2026
- Fortune, on Profound raising ninety six million dollars
- TechCrunch, on Peec crossing ten million dollars in annualized revenue, May 2026
- Sacra, the independent research profile of AirOps, revenue, product layers and funding
- MarketScale, on the TrustRadius finding that buyers fact check AI
- Profound, the published pricing page and plan comparison, read 29 August 2026
- Profound, the published Answer Engine Insights page, read 29 August 2026
- Profound, the published Agents page, read 29 August 2026
- Profound, the published Agent Analytics page, read 29 August 2026
- Profound, the published Prompt Volumes page, read 29 August 2026
- Peec AI, the published product page, read 29 August 2026
- Peec AI, the published pricing page and plan comparison, read in a browser 29 August 2026
- AirOps, the published platform page, read 29 August 2026
- AirOps, the published pricing page and plan comparison, read 29 August 2026
- AirOps, the published offsite solution page, read 29 August 2026
Read next
The rest of this cluster, in the order it makes sense to read.
- What are the best answer engine optimization (AEO) tools in 2026
- Profound vs Peec AI vs Scrunch AI for visibility tracking
- AEO tools to avoid and the warning signs to look for
- Reporting only or reporting plus execution: the real divide in AEO tools
- AEO tools compared: engine coverage, citation tracking, and content execution