Arrow Shortlist Peec AI if your first buying decision is a defined tracking allowance across projects. Shortlist Profound if you want to evaluate visibility tracking alongside configurable content workflows. Both offer ways to act on findings. Choose the exact plan that fits your questions, evidence requirements and publishing process; a platform-wide feature list is not a promise about your subscription.
Peec AI vs Profound at a glance
Start with the package you can buy. The table separates published inclusions from checks that still belong in your demo. Feature availability can change; confirm the quoted scope before signing.
| Decision |  |  |
|---|---|---|
| Starting scope | Starter: 50 prompts, three selected models, one project; daily tracking and unlimited users. Peec plans | Trial: 50 prompts daily for seven days across ChatGPT, Gemini and Google AI Overviews. Profound plans |
| Scaling coverage | Pro lists 150 prompts and two projects; Advanced lists 350 and five. Enterprise is configurable. Peec plans | Enterprise offers custom prompt allowances, regions and languages, with daily tracking. Profound plans |
| Selecting questions | Confirm which models and countries are included in your chosen package. Additional models are sold as add-ons. Peec plans | Trial prompts are recommended and cannot be customized; Enterprise permits adding, editing and disabling them. Profound plans |
| Moving to action | The feature matrix lists gap analysis, recommended actions and agent actions. Confirm your plan’s allowances. Peec plans | Content workflows can produce briefs or drafts and connect to a CMS, with human review checkpoints. Optimization |
| Reporting and access | Advanced lists Looker Studio integration; Enterprise lists API access and SSO. Peec plans | Enterprise lists CSV/JSON exports, API access and SSO; the trial excludes these. Profound plans |
| Commercial terms | Verify the live amount, billing term, model add-ons and agent allowances. No fixed price is reproduced here. Peec plans | Trial is free; Enterprise is custom-priced. Agents consume credits, so request a workload estimate. Profound plans |
Which should your team shortlist first?
For a team starting with one brand and a small prompt panel, Peec’s published Starter allowance is a concrete scope to evaluate. Ask for a sample answer record and confirm your required markets before treating a tracking quota as a fit. Ease of use and data quality still need a trial; this comparison has not measured either.
For a team evaluating repeatable content production, Profound’s documented workflow connects analysis to briefs, drafts and CMS delivery. Ask to see a real page pass through your approval process. Its optimization documentation describes human checkpoints, but your actual configuration and subscription must support the process you intend to run.
For an existing analytics stack, start with data portability. Bring your reporting requirements to both demos: the fields you need, the history you can retain and the identity controls your team requires. An export that lacks the original answer may not support the review you want to perform.
Compare the answer behind the score
Bring the same five buying questions to both demos. Request the full answer, cited URLs, observation time, country, language and collection surface. Record whether the result comes from a consumer interface or an API, and whether a Google search actually displayed an AI Overview. Do not treat one surface as a substitute for another.
Then review one apparent win and one miss. Was the right company mentioned? Did the citation support the claim? Did the response recommend a product or only quote an educational page? Scores become useful when your team can inspect how the underlying observations were classified.
Use the same evaluation sheet for both products. Record “shown”, “documented only” or “not confirmed” for each requirement. A missing detail in a public page is a question for the vendor, not proof that a capability does not exist.
Budget for the work after the dashboard
Ask for a quote against a workload, not a headline tier: brands, markets, prompts, answer engines, collection frequency, agent runs and required integrations. Add your internal time for source checking, editorial review, publishing and remeasurement.
Before choosing, walk through one change from observation to publication. Identify who can approve it, who has CMS access, how the original version is preserved and who checks the next observation. Neither a generated recommendation nor a published draft proves that visibility improved.
Where Arrow fits in the decision
Arrow AI publishes this comparison and offers its own AI visibility platform. Use the same evidence requirements when evaluating Arrow. Review the platform’s stated measurement scope and request an audit of your public source pages before deciding whether its offer matches your needs.
For the wider selection process, continue with the GEO tools comparison hub. The next useful decision is what a pilot should deliver: a baseline, a small set of agreed changes and an observation record your team can inspect.
Your buyer checklist
- List the exact answer engines, markets and questions your team needs before selecting a plan.
- Ask each vendor to demonstrate an answer record, its citations and the collection conditions.
- Get the tracking allowances, exports, integrations and agent usage in the written quote.
- Name the reviewer and publisher for one proposed content change, then agree how to assess it.
Put both demos through the same exercise
Illustrative buying exercise: a B2B software team brings five English-language buying questions, one existing product page and a requirement for a weekly evidence export. In each demo, the team asks to inspect one complete answer, identify one source gap and prepare one proposed page update. It records what was demonstrated, what was only promised and what its own team must do. This is an evaluation protocol, not a test result or a claim that the two products support identical workflows.
Sources and editorial method
Research scope: public product documentation reviewed September 29, 2026. This is an editorial comparison by Arrow AI, which also offers an AI visibility platform, not a hands-on benchmark or a vendor endorsement. Product claims below are attributed to their sources; our buying recommendations are editorial judgment.
- Peec AI: brand plans, coverage and feature matrix — checked September 29, 2026
- Profound: Trial and Enterprise scope — checked September 29, 2026
- Profound: content optimization and CMS workflows — checked September 29, 2026
- Arrow: AI citation tracking methodology
- Arrow GEO: what the platform measures
Our example is illustrative, not a measured customer result. Read how Arrow sources and reviews its guides.