Before you buy a tool to track Perplexity, know what it is going to show you. Across 60 buyer questions in our own category, read on 17 September 2026, Perplexity returned an answer naming no product at all on 43 of them. That is 71.7%, against 28.3% for ChatGPT and 15.0% for Google AI Overviews. Most of the time, nobody is winning Perplexity. That changes what a tracker is worth.
Disclosure: GetIntel sells an AI visibility tool and ranks itself first here, which is what 16 of 17 vendor roundups do. Read the order as a vendor's order. Competitor prices are dated, and two we could not verify first-hand are marked as such.
Why does the open rate change the buying decision?
The open rate matters because "we are invisible on Perplexity" and "Perplexity is not recommending anyone" are different problems with different fixes.
Here is the full split from our own tracked set, 60 buyer questions across four engines, 7-day trailing window, read 17 September 2026. The raw rows ship as CSV and JSON.
| Engine | Answer names no product | Names a competitor, not us | Names GetIntel |
|---|---|---|---|
| Perplexity | 71.7% (43) | 10.0% (6) | 18.3% (11) |
| ChatGPT | 28.3% (17) | 60.0% (36) | 11.7% (7) |
| Google AI Overviews | 15.0% (9) | 75.0% (45) | 8.3% (5) |
| Gemini | 5.0% (3) | 95.0% (57) | 0.0% (0) |
Google AI Overviews returned nothing renderable on 1 of the 60 questions, so that row covers 59 and sums to 98.3% rather than 100%. The dataset carries it as a fourth state, no_answer.
On ChatGPT and Google, the field is mostly taken: a competitor is named and we are not. On Perplexity the field is mostly empty. A tracker pointed at Perplexity is therefore measuring an opportunity rather than a deficit, and the work that follows is getting named at all rather than displacing an incumbent.
One honest caveat, stated plainly because it changes how much weight the number carries: Perplexity is sampled at about 2 runs per question in our set, against 6 to 7 for the other engines. The aggregate across roughly 120 Perplexity observations is the defensible figure. A per-question Perplexity rate off 2 runs is not, so we do not report one.
Which tools actually track Perplexity, and what do they cost?
Seven tools track Perplexity, from $29 to $250 a month, and the cheapest is not the thinnest: Perplexity sits in the base engine set on most of these rather than behind an upsell. Ranked below, with each vendor's own published figures on the date shown.
| Tool | Entry price | Perplexity in the base tier? | Refresh | Price read |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GetIntel | $29/mo | Yes, all four engines daily | Daily | 17 Sep 2026 |
| Otterly.AI | $29/mo | Yes, no per-engine upsell | Daily | 22 Aug, re-checked 17 Sep 2026 |
| LLM Pulse | 49 euros/mo | Yes, five models at entry | Weekly | 15 Sep 2026 |
| Dageno | $79/mo | Yes | Not stated | 22 Aug 2026 |
| Peec AI | $95/mo | Competes for one of three model slots | Daily | 26 Aug 2026 |
| Scrunch AI | $250/mo | Yes, one of four LLMs | Not stated | 15 Sep 2026 |
| AthenaHQ | ~$295/mo | Yes, on the entry tier | Not stated | 26 Aug 2026, price third-party |
1. GetIntel, from $29/month
GetIntel runs Perplexity daily on every paid plan alongside ChatGPT, Gemini and Google AI Overviews, with Claude weekly on the $149 Growth plan. Monitor is $29 for 25 buyer questions, Pro $79 for 60, Growth $149 for 120, verified against our own pricing page on 17 September 2026. The difference from the rest of this list is what happens after the measurement: each gap becomes a ranked task, and the fix ships through Claude Code or Cursor over MCP into your own repository, with your approval. Choose something else if you want a mature enterprise reporting suite; this is a young product and the proof is the public dogfooding page rather than a logo wall.
2. Otterly.AI, from $29/month
Otterly.AI covers four engines on every tier with Perplexity included and no per-engine upsell. $29 Lite for 15 prompts, $189 Standard for 100, $489 Premium for 400, Enterprise from $1,000. Extra prompts are $99 per 100. Prices read 22 August 2026 and re-checked 17 September 2026.
The detail that matters if Perplexity is what you care about: Otterly advertises seven surfaces, but Claude, Gemini and Google AI Mode are paid add-ons on every tier including the $489 Premium. Perplexity is in the base four, so you are not paying an upsell to see it. Its MCP server also exposes citations, sources and raw responses to Claude, Cursor and Zapier, which is worth more on Perplexity than anywhere else, because Perplexity numbers its sources and is the most legible engine in this category for source analysis.
Choose Otterly when you want the simplest prompt-count ladder and do not need the fix drafted for you. It is the cleanest pure-monitoring product in the set.
3. Peec AI, from $95/month
Peec AI sells $95 Starter for 50 prompts, $245 Pro for 150, $495 Advanced for 350, and a custom Enterprise tier. Figures taken live from their pricing page on 17 September 2026. The detail that matters for Perplexity specifically: Peec gives you three models chosen from a pool of six, so Perplexity competes for a slot with ChatGPT, Gemini, AI Overviews, AI Mode and Copilot. A fourth model is an add-on at $30, $70 or $140 a month by tier. Choose Peec when you want unlimited seats and strong reporting, and you are comfortable picking three engines.
4. LLM Pulse, from 49 euros/month
LLM Pulse includes Perplexity on its entry Starter plan, which covers five models, and the ladder runs Starter 49 euros, Growth 99 and Scale 299. Taken from their pricing page in our 15 September 2026 capture.
The limitation to price in is cadence rather than coverage: LLM Pulse refreshes prompts weekly. That matters more on Perplexity than on the other engines. This article's own advice is to run each question five times because answer engines are non-deterministic, and a weekly single reading is the thinnest evidence base in this list. It will show you a trend over a quarter. It will not tell you whether the thing you shipped on Tuesday moved anything.
Choose LLM Pulse when budget is the binding constraint and you want more than three engines at the entry tier.
5. Dageno, from $79/month
Dageno sells three self-serve tiers at $79, $199 and $499 plus Enterprise, read 22 August 2026, with annual billing presenting those as $67, $169 and $424. Perplexity appears in their engine coverage.
Check which product you are buying before you compare that price to anything else here. Dageno runs two separate lines: Visibility, which is the tracker and the figures above, and Market Intelligence, a different product whose own tiers start at $49 and run through an $89 to $199 band to $410, read from our 17 September 2026 capture of their pricing pages. The cheaper numbers are easy to find and are not the visibility tracker. There is also a genuinely ungated free research tier at insight.dageno.ai, which is a fair way to see the data shape before paying.
Choose Dageno when you want the tracker and the market data from one vendor and can keep the two product lines straight.
6. Scrunch AI, $250/month
Scrunch AI sells one self-serve tier, Core at $250 for 125 prompts and four LLMs, then Enterprise with nine. Read 15 September 2026. Its pricing page names the four outright, and Perplexity is one of them, alongside ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews and Copilot. Enterprise adds Claude, Gemini, Meta AI, Google AI Mode and Grok.
The number worth doing yourself: $250 for 125 prompts is $2.00 per prompt per month. Otterly's $189 Standard covers 100 for $1.89, and its $489 Premium covers 400 for $1.22. GetIntel's $149 Growth covers 120 for $1.24. Scrunch is not badly priced per prompt, it simply has no floor: there is no plan under $250, so it is the only tool here a small team cannot try cheaply.
Choose Scrunch when you are buying for a brand team with a budget and want Copilot covered alongside Perplexity.
7. AthenaHQ, around $295/month
Perplexity is covered on AthenaHQ's entry tier, alongside ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, Gemini and Copilot, read from their own pricing page on 26 August 2026 and detailed in AthenaHQ pricing 2026. Engine coverage is tier-gated there, so check which tier you are quoted.
The price is the part we cannot stand behind. It is reported at $295 for 3,500 credits, but their pricing page renders figures in JavaScript and our capture returned none, so that number comes from a third party rather than from AthenaHQ directly. Treat it as indicative, and note that credits are a different unit from the prompt counts every other tool on this page is sold in, so it is not directly comparable to the per-prompt rates above.
Not on this list: Profound. It published $99 and $399 self-serve tiers earlier in 2026 and has withdrawn both. As of 17 September 2026 its pricing page offers a free trial and a custom Enterprise plan only, so there is no self-serve Perplexity tracking to rank. Detail in Profound pricing 2026.
What should a Perplexity tracker actually show you?
A Perplexity tracker should show three things, and a surprising number stop at the first.
- Whether you were named, and in what position. The floor. Every tool here does it.
- The sources behind the answer. Perplexity retrieves the live web and shows numbered citations, which makes it the most legible engine in the category for source analysis. A tracker that reports a score without the cited URLs is throwing away the most useful thing Perplexity gives you.
- Whether the answer named anyone at all. This is the one most tools collapse. If "open" and "a competitor won" both render as "you are not visible", you cannot tell an easy win from a hard one, and on Perplexity that distinction covers 71.7% of questions.
How do you check this yourself before buying anything?
Run your own ten buyer questions through Perplexity logged out, five times each, and record three columns: were you named, was anyone named, and which URLs were cited.
Logged out matters, because a signed-in session carries memory and personalisation and will describe your account rather than your market. Five runs per question matters because answer engines are non-deterministic; a single run is an anecdote, which is exactly why we refuse to publish a per-question Perplexity rate off our own two.
If most of your answers come back naming nobody, you have an open field and the job is to become the obvious thing to name. If most name a competitor, that is a displacement problem and a slower one. The free check covers 20 buyer questions across three engines without a signup if you would rather not do it by hand.
Where these figures came from
The Perplexity engine coverage table above is GetIntel's own tracked buyer-question set, read from our product on 17 September 2026 over a 7-day trailing window, with the per-prompt rows published above so the percentages can be recomputed. It is one category and one brand's prompt set, so treat it as a strong signal about this market rather than a general claim about Perplexity.
Competitor prices were read from each vendor's own pricing page on the dates stated. One is explicitly not first-party: AthenaHQ's price. An earlier version also listed Scrunch's four-LLM composition as unverified, which was wrong: their pricing page names all four, and our search missed it because the model names render run together without separators. Those are marked rather than smoothed over, because a pricing grid that hides its gaps is the thing that makes these roundups worth ignoring.
The mirror image of this article is ChatGPT, where a competitor is named instead of you 60% of the time and the field is usually already taken rather than open. If you want the engine that is hardest for you, it is probably not Perplexity. On our data Gemini named us in zero of 919 answers, and first named us on 10 August 2026 across 60 questions, and the sources AI actually cites explain more of the gap than any tracker's score does.