AI visibility tools cost an agency somewhere between $49 and $295 a month per brand among the vendors that publish a price at all, and three of the eight we checked publish nothing. The number matters less than the model: per client, pooled across your book, or a flat agency tier. We re-read every page listed here on 20 September 2026.
Disclosure: GetIntel sells AI visibility monitoring to agencies and appears in the vendor pricing table in this article. Every competitor figure was read from that vendor's own pricing page on the date stated, using a plain fetch rather than a cached capture.
What each vendor published on 20 September 2026
Three of the eight vendors bill per brand, one bills by credits, one bundles the AI layer into an SEO suite, and three publish no price at all.
| Vendor | What their own pricing page showed, read 20 September 2026 | Unit |
|---|---|---|
| AthenaHQ | Free tier with 300 credits, Starter $295/mo with 3,600 credits, Enterprise custom. Annual 17% off | credits, 1 credit = 1 AI response |
| Dageno | Starter $49/mo, listed as marked down from $89, scoped to one brand | per brand |
| GetIntel | $79 a client brand for 3 to 9 clients, $59 for 10 to 24, custom above | per client brand |
| SE Ranking | GEO limits bundled into the SEO suite: 100 and 250 daily prompts, 5 LLMs tracked, extra seats from $16 | per suite seat |
| Geoptie | Seven engines with any four per brand on every plan, unlimited brands on a tier, an Enterprise tier, +100 prompts at $99/mo | per brand, with add-ons |
| Peec AI | Four tiers named (Starter, Pro, Advanced, Enterprise), no prices rendered | not published |
| Profound | No monthly figure anywhere. Enterprise and Demo only | not published |
| Otterly | Page could not be read by any method tried | not published |
Three of the eight publish nothing, and that is a finding
A vendor that does not publish a price is telling an agency something useful: quoting a client requires a sales conversation first. Profound is the clearest case. Its pricing page carried no monthly figure at all when read on 20 September 2026, with Enterprise appearing nine times and Demo four. That is consistent with the $99 and $399 self-serve tiers still quoted widely elsewhere, our own older articles included, no longer being offered. One page read does not establish when, or whether they were formally withdrawn rather than gated.
Peec AI renders four tier names with no prices attached. Otterly's pricing page could not be read at all, by plain fetch or by any rendering method available on the day.
A missing price does not make Peec AI or Otterly worse products. It makes them slower to quote against, which is a real cost when a prospect asks what the monitoring will add to their retainer and the honest answer is that you will have to find out.
The model matters more than the number
Four pricing models are in use across the eight AI visibility vendors covered in this article, and they behave very differently as a client book grows.
| Model | Who uses it | What it does to an agency |
|---|---|---|
| Per client brand | GetIntel, Dageno (single brand) | cost scales with the book; each client can be priced into its own retainer |
| Credits or consumption | AthenaHQ | cost scales with usage, so a per-client figure has to be forecast rather than read |
| Bundled into a suite | SE Ranking | the AI layer arrives with crawling, rank tracking and link data you may already buy |
| Not published | Profound, Peec, Otterly | a procurement call before you can quote |
The credit model deserves the most attention because it is the least comparable. AthenaHQ's Starter includes 3,600 credits where one credit is one AI response. Converting that into a cost per client requires knowing how many prompts each client tracks and how often they run, which is a forecast. Per-client and per-seat models are easier to quote from because their unit matches the unit the agency bills in.
What bundling actually costs you
A bundled AI layer is only cheap if you do not already own the rest of the bundle. SE Ranking's GEO limits, read on 20 September 2026, arrive inside the SEO suite: 100 and 250 daily prompts depending on plan, five LLMs tracked, and extra manager seats from $16. For an agency that already pays for rank tracking and backlink data elsewhere, most of that spend duplicates tools already on the books.
The reverse holds for an agency with no incumbent suite, which gets more for the money from a bundle than from a standalone AI visibility tool, and should weigh the whole bundle rather than comparing the AI feature in isolation.
What we could not establish
Three limits are worth stating plainly, because a pricing comparison that hides them is the kind that gets quoted back wrongly.
Geoptie's tier prices could not be read cleanly. The engine policy and the +100 prompts at $99 a month add-on were legible on the page; the tier figures were not, so they are not quoted here.
Koalr's page contains a range of $189 to $500 a month, and it is not their rate card. It sits in their own FAQ describing what the category charges. Anyone building a comparison from page scrapes will pick that up as a vendor price, and it is not one.
Annual versus monthly billing is not normalised across the vendor prices quoted in this article. AthenaHQ states 17 percent off annually; where a vendor publishes only an annual-equivalent monthly rate, the monthly cost of paying monthly is higher than the number shown.
What to check on any vendor pricing page
Five checks separate a price you can quote a client from a number you will have to retract. Run them on every vendor, including this one.
| Check | Why it matters to an agency |
|---|---|
| Is the unit a brand, a seat, or a credit? | only a per-brand unit maps cleanly onto a per-client retainer line |
| Does the monthly price assume annual billing? | a monthly-billed rate is often higher than the figure displayed |
| Are engines counted per plan or per brand? | seven engines with four usable per brand is not seven-engine coverage |
| Is the number on the page their price or the category average? | vendor FAQs often quote what the market charges, which reads as a rate card in a scrape |
| Does a price appear at all without a demo? | a sales-led vendor means a procurement call before you can quote |
What this costs against a real retainer
Software is not where an agency's margin goes. Two marketing agencies, not AI-visibility vendors, publish retainer ranges: Nutshell and WebFX put small-business GEO retainers at $1,500 to $5,000 a month, and Digital Elevator puts mid-market AEO and GEO retainers at $2,000 to $8,000. Both were read on 28 August 2026 and neither is our own measurement. Against the Nutshell and WebFX small-business band, a per-brand tool at $49 to $295 works out between 1.0 and 19.7 percent of what the client is billed, and the top of that only applies if you pay the highest published rate against the smallest retainer.
The more useful framing is that the licence is a rounding error and the hours are not. The real margin math on an AI visibility retainer works that through, and packaging AI visibility as an agency service line covers what you are actually selling on top of the tool.
How to read any pricing comparison, including this one
Check the date on every figure. Three of the eight pages read for this article disagreed with what is widely published about those vendors: Profound showed no self-serve tiers, AthenaHQ showed a published $295 Starter rather than custom pricing only, and Dageno showed $49 against a listed $89. We can date what each page said on 20 September 2026. We cannot date when each of those changed, and this page does not claim to.
A pricing comparison with no check date is not a resource, it is a liability, and that applies to this page as much as to anyone else's. Every figure here carries 20 September 2026, and this page is on a six to eight week re-check. If you are reading it well after that date, open the vendor's own page before you quote a client.