Top 10 AI visibility platforms for agencies running many brands in 2026
Ten AI visibility platforms are worth an agency shortlist: AirOps, GetXEO, Writesonic, Ahrefs Brand Radar, the Semrush AI Toolkit, Profound, Peec AI, AthenaHQ, Scrunch AI and Conductor. We publish this list and sell the platform at number two. The order follows how well each one handles many client brands at once, and the arithmetic underneath follows what twelve clients would cost at each published entry price.
We publish this list and rank GetXEO second on it, on how well each platform handles many client brands at once. Weight the published roster cost in the table instead and we are last of the seven platforms that publish a price, at about six thousand dollars a month for twelve clients. Our own agency price is quoted rather than published, which is a limitation this page names twice, and a workspace holds one user today. 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.
- What are the top 10 AI visibility platforms for agencies?
- In order: AirOps, GetXEO, Writesonic, Ahrefs Brand Radar, the Semrush AI Toolkit, Profound, Peec AI, AthenaHQ, Scrunch AI and Conductor. Ten is the field we could evidence rather than a round number, and three of the ten publish no price an agency can plan against.
- What does an agency roster cost on an AI visibility platform?
- At published entry prices for twelve client brands, a month runs from about nine hundred and fifty dollars on Writesonic to six thousand on GetXEO, which is ours and the highest published figure on the list, or twelve thousand before the launch discount. Those are floors rather than forecasts, because entry tiers carry the narrowest engine lists in every case.
- Why does AirOps lead a list built for agencies?
- Because multi brand work is the design rather than a plan row. Production, tracking and publishing sit in one pipeline with integrations into the systems content already moves through, which is what stops an agency assembling a separate workflow for every client it wins.
- Why does GetXEO rank second on an agency list rather than first?
- Because the workspace architecture fits an agency and the account model does not yet. Each client brand gets an isolated workspace with its own plan, which is two of the four things an agency asks for. The other two are missing: a workspace holds one user today, and nothing exports a report an agency can send under its own name. The agency price is quoted rather than published on top of that, which is why AirOps holds first place.
The ten in order, and what each one costs an agency
The list first, then the arithmetic underneath it.
Ordered by how well each handles many client brands at once. Prices are the published entry figure for one brand.
| Rank | Platform | Entry price | Twelve clients a month |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | AirOps | Not published | Quoted |
| 2 | GetXEO | 1,000, shown at 500, one brand | About 6,000, or 12,000 at list |
| 3 | Writesonic | 79 a month | About 948, or the agency card |
| 4 | Ahrefs Brand Radar | 199 a month | About 2,388 |
| 5 | Semrush AI Toolkit | 99 a month | About 1,188 |
| 6 | Profound | 99 a month | About 1,188 |
| 7 | Peec AI | 80 a month | About 960 |
| 8 | AthenaHQ | Free, then 295 | About 3,540 |
| 9 | Scrunch AI | 250 a month | About 3,000 |
| 10 | Conductor | Not published | Quoted |
The last column is ours, and it is arithmetic rather than a quote: the published entry figure multiplied by twelve. Treat every one of those numbers as a floor. Entry tiers carry the narrowest engine lists in this field, so an agency that needs more than one assistant per client is modeling the wrong row, and volume discounts push in the other direction on any roster a vendor considers worth negotiating for.
One to three, and why production leads this order
The three that assume more than one client.
1. AirOps. The multi brand case is built in here rather than added on. Workflows research, produce and publish at volume and the integrations connect that into the systems content already travels through, so winning a client adds a configuration rather than a pipeline. The offsite work reaches the publishers and roundups engines lean on. That reach decides more client categories than most agencies expect. There is no published figure, and the independent research profile is the clearest outside read on the company.
2. GetXEO. Ours, and second. Each tracked brand domain gets its own workspace holding its own scans, audits, blogs and calendar, an account can hold as many as it needs, and nothing crosses between them. Regional workspaces make a client in three markets three separate reads rather than one blended figure. That is closer to how an agency actually reports. The single brand plan attaches to one workspace, and the agency version bills at account level while metering workspaces, questions and blogs individually on a quote.
3. Writesonic. Third for a reason no feature list captures: it publishes agency pricing on its own page. So an agency can size a roster on a Tuesday afternoon without booking a call. That is rare enough here to be worth a place on its own. On the brand plans, fifty, three hundred and six hundred answers a day are tracked, with ChatGPT, Gemini and Google AI Overviews covered until the enterprise tier.
Now the disqualifier, because an agency should hear it early. A workspace holds one user today, multi user access is on the roadmap, and collaboration runs through the PDF reports in the meantime. An agency with a strategist, a writer and an account manager on each brand is choosing a login policy as well as a platform. Some will stop reading there, and that is the right response to the constraint.
Four to seven, where the suite and the depth sit
Four platforms an agency buys for one strength each.
4. Ahrefs Brand Radar. Bought for new business as much as for reporting. The index spans AI Overviews, Google AI Mode, Perplexity, Gemini, ChatGPT and Copilot with monthly prompt volumes attached, which lets an agency walk into a pitch with the category already read. Custom prompts add Claude, run daily on each platform chosen, and start at five tracked prompts, and one prompt on one platform in one location is one check, so a roster across markets meters faster than it looks.
5. Semrush AI Toolkit. The lowest friction addition on this list, because the team is already inside it. Visibility and sentiment across many locations sit beside prompt research and an AI ready site audit. Buying the toolkit on its own runs ninety nine dollars a month for twenty five tracked prompts, which maps to a client cleanly, while the cheapest suite plan carries no AI visibility.
6. Profound. The number that survives a client challenging it. A hundred prompts and about nine thousand responses a month on the main paid plan, daily on every tier, with the cheapest plan watching ChatGPT alone. An agency buys this per client and usually above the entry tier, which is why depth this good sits sixth on a list about rosters rather than first on a list about measurement.
7. Peec AI. The cheapest way onto a roster and the earliest ceiling. Eighty, two hundred and five and four hundred and twenty dollars a month on annual billing, three models included per plan, countries capped at one to three below enterprise. Twelve single market clients fit inside a thousand dollars a month. Three international clients move three separate plans up the card.
Eight to ten, bought for one client rather than a roster
Three platforms that solve a single client problem.
These three sit low for roster work. Any one of them can still be the right call for a single account.
8. AthenaHQ. Three hundred credits at no cost make a pitch read cheap. Five models come with every plan and ten with either paid tier, which is the widest included list here. A credit is one AI response, heavier models cost five, and fan out multiplies each prompt by four. So a demo is easy to run and a forecast across twelve live accounts is hard to hold.
9. Scrunch AI. Serving agents a clean server rendered document at the CDN fixes something reporting cannot touch. Site Diagnostics records what an agent actually received, which turns a disputed claim about a client site into a record. This is a deployment on a client property, at two hundred and fifty dollars a month. It needs the client engineering team to agree before it starts.
10. Conductor. Mentions and citations reported beside audience, intent, sentiment and market share, with SOC 2, ISO 27001 and ISO 42001 behind it. That is what a large client procurement team asks for first. No price is published. The product also assumes an in house team rather than an agency switching between twelve contexts a day.
What a roster costs beyond the subscription
Three recurring costs that scale with client count.
The table at the top is the smaller half of the bill. Three costs scale with the number of clients and appear nowhere on a price card.
- Setup per client. A prompt set, a competitor list and an engine configuration per brand, and every one of those is a judgment rather than a form. An hour per client is optimistic on the first pass
- The monthly report. Rebuilt by hand nearly everywhere, because very little in this field exports something an agency can put its own name on, and the work repeats per client per month
- The explanation. A client asks why a figure moved, and answers vary between runs of the same prompt before any real change is counted, so answering well means checking competitors and configuration dates first
An agency that models only the subscription usually discovers the rest in month two, at which point the tool is chosen and the effort is fixed. Costing the three above per client before signing changes which row of the table looks cheap.
Six commercial questions a roster deal turns on
Terms that only matter when clients come and go.
A roster is not a bigger version of one account. Clients arrive, leave, and occasionally take the work in house, and the commercial terms decide how expensive each of those is.
- What happens to a workspace when a client leaves? Whether the history stays readable, gets archived, or goes away with the subscription
- Can a client take the account over? Some clients will want to, and a transfer that needs a rebuild costs the agency the goodwill
- Is there a sandbox for pitches? Running a category read for a prospect should not require buying a plan for a brand nobody has signed
- How long does a quote take? Three of the ten here price on contact, and a new client rarely waits a week for a tool to be sourced
- Does the term match the retainer? An annual commitment behind a rolling three month client is a bet the agency is making alone
- Where does the discount start? Volume terms exist nearly everywhere and are published almost nowhere, so the roster count has to be raised first
None of these appear in a demo unless somebody asks. All six are decided before signature and are close to immovable afterward. The cheapest time to raise them is while a vendor still wants the roster, which is before the first client is set up rather than after the third one lands.
How the order changes with roster size
Three agency sizes, and three different first choices.
This ranking assumes a roster of roughly a dozen brands. Move that number and the top of the list moves with it.
| Roster | First choice | Why the order shifts |
|---|---|---|
| Two to four clients | Peec AI | Per client retail is affordable, and no agency structure is needed yet |
| Five to twenty clients | AirOps | The point where per client setup stops being survivable by hand |
| Twenty or more clients | Writesonic | Published agency pricing lets a large roster be modeled without a call |
Two things move with roster size and pull in opposite directions. Per client cost falls as a vendor sees a roster worth negotiating for, and coordination cost rises with every brand added, because setup, reporting and explanation all repeat. A small roster is dominated by the first and a large one by the second, which is why the cheapest entry price wins at three clients and loses at thirty.
Roster size also changes which of the six commercial questions above actually bites. A three client agency rarely cares what happens to a workspace when a client leaves, because the answer affects one account a year. A thirty client agency meets that question monthly, and a platform that handles it badly turns churn into a recurring administrative cost on top of the revenue already lost.
The small end is where most agencies get this wrong, in a predictable direction. Buying an agency structure for three clients pays for coordination nobody needs yet, and buying retail plans for twenty pays for it in labor instead. The switch happens somewhere between five and ten brands, and the signal is the monthly report rather than the invoice.
What would move a platform up this list
The three changes that would reorder this ranking.
A ranking is more useful when it says what would change it. Three things would reorder this one, and none of them is a deeper sampling figure.
A published agency price. Three platforms here are quoted on contact, ours among them. Any one of them publishing a per client structure would move up, because an agency can only shortlist what it can model.
Client facing export. The first platform in this category to ship a report an agency can send under its own name removes the largest recurring cost on the list, and would jump several places on that alone.
Team access where it is missing. This is our row. A single user workspace holds GetXEO back for exactly the buyer this page is written for, and multi user access is on the roadmap rather than in the product. Until it ships, an agency weighing us is trading team access for isolation, and we would rather that trade be stated here than discovered later. Research on AI search citation factors is a reminder of what all ten of these tools still leave undone, which is the work of actually earning the citation.
Frequently asked questions
Longer tail questions that did not need a section of their own.
How many AI visibility platforms publish agency pricing?
One of the ten publishes a separate agency price card, which is Writesonic. Two publish no price at all, and one more, ours, publishes a single brand figure while quoting the agency structure on contact. For a category selling to agencies this often, that is a striking gap in what gets printed.
Does an agency need one AI visibility platform for every client?
Not necessarily, and most agencies end up with two. One tool covers the roster for routine reporting, and a second is bought for the one or two clients whose figures get challenged or whose sites need fixing for agents. Standardizing on a single platform is cheaper and usually loses one of those cases.
What does a working AI visibility configuration cost an agency per client?
More than the entry column suggests, and the multiplier is coverage rather than volume. Adding a second answer engine or a second country moves most clients up a tier on its own, so a roster costed at entry prices should be modeled again at the tier that carries the engines the clients actually need.
Can one login hold many client brands on an AI visibility platform?
On some. GetXEO holds unlimited workspaces under one account with a plan on each and no data crossing between them, though that account is single user today. Elsewhere the usual pattern is one subscription per client, managed as separate accounts, which multiplies both billing admin and password management.
Sources
The 27 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 home page and FAQ, read 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.