Who measures brand visibility across AI assistants?
AI Visibility Monitoring and Measurement: What The Shortlist Report Finds
Profound appeared in 62.5% of 224 AI responses to this question, ahead of everyone else.
Profound leads
Profound comes up more than any other firm on this question, by a clear margin.
Profound140 of 224
Tracks brand mentions, citations, and recommendation visibility across AI search experiences; also optimizes ecommerce product feeds and schema.
Peec AI126 of 224
Tracks AI search visibility, competitive monitoring, and answer-engine presence across markets and languages.
Semrush118 of 224
SEO platform expanding to track AI visibility, mentions, and brand monitoring across AI search results.
Ahrefs117 of 224
Provides traditional search intelligence and AI citation monitoring tools tracking mentions across AI engines.
Otterly104 of 224
Provides AI-visibility tracking platform at lower cost than agency-only reporting.
+5 more namedin the table
Based on 224 ChatGPT responses to this question, collected September 3, 2026–October 29, 2026. Firms are counted once per response. How we measure.
The ranking
| Firm | Responses | Share | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tier 1 stands alone | |||
| Profoundtryprofound.comTracks brand mentions, citations, and recommendation visibility across AI search experiences; also optimizes ecommerce product feeds and schema. | 140 of 224 | 62.5% | |
| Tier 2 3 firms, 52.2–56.2% | |||
| Peec AITracks AI search visibility, competitive monitoring, and answer-engine presence across markets and languages. | 126 of 224 | 56.2% | |
| Semrushsemrush.comSEO platform expanding to track AI visibility, mentions, and brand monitoring across AI search results. | 118 of 224 | 52.7% | |
| Ahrefsahrefs.comProvides traditional search intelligence and AI citation monitoring tools tracking mentions across AI engines. | 117 of 224 | 52.2% | |
| Tier 3 stands alone | |||
| Otterlyotterly.aiProvides AI-visibility tracking platform at lower cost than agency-only reporting. | 104 of 224 | 46.4% | |
| Tier 4 2 firms, 15.6–22.8% | |||
| Scrunchscrunch.comOperates an AI-visibility tracking platform monitoring brand mentions across AI engines. | 51 of 224 | 22.8% | |
| Search AgencyTracks named prompts and citations across AI assistants with monthly reporting on citation share, mentions, and sentiment. | 35 of 224 | 15.6% | |
| Tier 5 3 firms, 9.8–10.7% | |||
| AIS Insightsaisinsights.comTracks brand mentions, citations, recommendations, and competitor visibility across AI search systems over time. | 24 of 224 | 10.7% | |
| HubSpothubspot.comSoftware product measuring AI visibility signals, brand mentions, and citations across AI platforms. | 22 of 224 | 9.8% | |
| Measuremeasure.coSelf-serve platform tracking AI citations and connecting AI visibility to GA4 traffic and conversions. | 22 of 224 | 9.8% | |
Key findings
- Profound leads this sample alone, named in 140 of 224 ChatGPT responses (62.5%) to the question “Who measures brand visibility across AI assistants?”, collected September 3, 2026–October 29, 2026.
- 10 firms cleared the reporting threshold on “Who measures brand visibility across AI assistants?” in ChatGPT as of October 29, 2026; the full table with response counts is below.
- Profound appears in 4 of the 11 AEO, GEO and AI visibility agencies reports published by The Shortlist Report, the widest coverage of any firm named on this page.
- No firm paid to appear in this ranking; placement cannot be bought, and the counts come from ChatGPT responses rather than from submissions.
Why the tiers fall where they do
Tier 1 holds Profound, named in 140 of 224 ChatGPT responses (62.5%). No other firm in this sample comes close enough to be grouped with it.
Tier 2 holds Peec AI, Semrush and Ahrefs, named in 117 to 126 of 224 responses (52.2–56.2%). The sample does separate these firms from the tier above: the difference from the leading group is larger than the margin of error, which is what puts them in a tier of their own.
Tier 3 holds Otterly, named in 104 to 104 of 224 responses (46.4–46.4%). The sample does separate this firm from the tier above: the difference from the leading group is larger than the margin of error, which is what puts it in a tier of its own.
Tier 4 holds Scrunch and Search Agency, named in 35 to 51 of 224 responses (15.6–22.8%). The sample does separate these firms from the tier above: the difference from the leading group is larger than the margin of error, which is what puts them in a tier of their own.
Tier 5 holds AIS Insights, HubSpot and Measure, named in 22 to 24 of 224 responses (9.8–10.7%). The sample does separate these firms from the tier above: the difference from the leading group is larger than the margin of error, which is what puts them in a tier of their own.
The test is McNemar’s at 95%, applied against the same 224 responses for every firm. The full reasoning, and what happened when we ranked one-to-N instead.
What the sample shows
Profound leads on its own, named in 140 of the 224 responses to this question (62.5%).
290 firms were named at least once across the sample. 10 of them cleared the threshold of 2 responses and appear above; the rest were named once and are inside the noise.
How to read this
Firms are grouped into tiers, not ranked one to fifteen. A tier holds every firm whose 95% confidence interval overlaps the leader's, which is a long way of saying the sample cannot tell them apart. Order within a tier is arbitrary — read the counts, not the position.
Share is the percentage of responses that named the firm — not a quality score. A firm scoring low here may be excellent and simply under-written about online, which is a finding about its visibility rather than its work.
The same question was asked repeatedly because AI assistants do not answer identically twice. A single response would tell you almost nothing.
What this measurement does not tell you
- It is not a quality ranking. Share reflects how much has been written about a firm online, which is what an AI assistant reads. A capable firm nobody writes about scores low here.
- It is a reading from a date range, not a permanent standing. This sample was collected September 3, 2026–October 29, 2026; models change and so do their answers.
- It covers ChatGPT only. Other assistants answer differently, and we do not extrapolate across engines we have not measured.
- Order within a tier is arbitrary. Read the counts, not the position. Why we use tiers.
Cite this report
The Shortlist Report. (2026). AI Visibility Monitoring and Measurement: What The Shortlist Report Finds. The Shortlist Report. https://www.shortlistreport.com/article/ai-visibility-monitoring-agencies
Underlying counts: CSV · JSON. Every answer they were counted from: plain text · JSON. All reusable under CC BY 4.0 with attribution.