AI-visibility tracking costs scale with three multiplying factors: how many AI engines you track, how many times you sample each prompt, and how many prompts you run per cycle. A realistic monthly workload for one brand — 3 engines, 30-40 prompts, sampled a few times per week — adds up to thousands of individual API calls, because grounded AI queries are metered per request, not crawled in bulk like a search-engine rank tracker. That's the honest cost structure behind this category: there's no flat SEO-tool pricing logic to borrow, because the unit economics are API calls, not page crawls.
Count the engines you actually need
Every AI engine you track is a separate integration with its own cost model. TAMGIO's ongoing tracking runs on three engines — OpenAI web_search (gpt-4.1-mini), Perplexity Sonar (always grounded), and Gemini grounded search. Google AI Overviews (via SerpAPI) is added in Audit Mode, for four measured surfaces in total. Each is billed differently, and each is a separate call your tracking has to make for every prompt, every cycle — tracking three engines isn't "3x the insight" for free, it's three metered requests per prompt. Decide which surfaces your buyers actually use before you commit: a B2B tool evaluated mostly through ChatGPT and Perplexity gets most of its signal from the ongoing three, while a local-intent product that lives and dies by AI Overviews will want Audit Mode runs more often.
Set your sample size per prompt
AI answers are non-deterministic — the same prompt run twice can return a different answer, a different set of citations, or no mention at all. A single-shot check of "does the AI mention us" isn't a measurement, it's a coin flip. That's why TAMGIO only reports N-sample proxy measures — Mention Rate, Share of Voice, Citation Rate, Prompt Coverage — built from running the same prompt multiple times and treating the result as a rate, not a yes/no. Sample size is a direct cost multiplier: sampling a prompt three times instead of once triples the API calls behind that one number. Fewer samples is cheaper and less reliable; more samples is more expensive and more trustworthy. There's no shortcut around that trade-off — it's inherent to how these models work, not a limitation of any particular tool.
Decide your prompt count and cadence
A workable tracking project usually needs 30-40 prompts spread across real buyer intents — best-of lists, direct comparisons, how-to questions, local searches, pricing questions — because visibility looks different in each intent category. Cadence is the other lever: daily tracking catches volatility that weekly tracking misses, but it also multiplies monthly call volume several times over depending on how many days you sample. This is also why a one-time Audit Mode scan — 10–12 prompts × 3 LLM engines × N=2 + Google AI Overviews, run once — is a cheaper way to get a first read before committing to a recurring tracking budget.
Run the cost formula
Once you know your inputs, it's simple multiplication: prompts × engines × samples per cycle × cycles per month = monthly API call volume. Every one of those four numbers is a lever you control. Doubling your engine count doubles your bill at the same sample size; doubling your sample size does the same. This is also why cost claims that don't disclose sample size or engine count aren't really estimates — "we track your AI visibility" without specifying N and coverage tells you nothing about what you're paying for or how reliable the resulting number is.
| Cost multiplier | Choice described in the article | Effect on volume |
|---|---|---|
| Prompt count | Usually 30–40 prompts spread across real buyer intents | Every added prompt creates calls across all selected engines and samples |
| Engine count | Three engines in ongoing tracking and four surfaces in Audit Mode | Doubling engine count doubles call volume at the same sample size |
| Sample size | Running each prompt N times instead of once | Three samples instead of one triples the calls behind that prompt |
| Cadence | Daily, weekly, or a one-time audit | More cycles increase monthly call volume |
Compare it against published market prices
Published prices in this category track engine count and prompt volume far more closely than feature depth. The table below is what vendor pages listed when we last checked them — a dated snapshot, not a quote, and the reason every row carries a source link above.
| Tool | Published entry price | What that tier includes |
|---|---|---|
| Otterly.AI | $29/mo (Lite) | 15 prompts, 4 engines, 50+ countries |
| Semrush AI Toolkit | $99/mo per domain, billed yearly | 25 prompts, 7-day trial, add-on to the Semrush suite |
| Profound | $99/mo Starter · $399/mo Growth, billed yearly | Starter is ChatGPT only; Growth covers ChatGPT, Perplexity and Google AI Overviews; up to 9 engines on Enterprise |
| Scrunch AI | $250/mo Starter, billed annually ($300 monthly) | 3 seats, 350 custom prompts, 6 platforms (ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity, Google AI Mode/Overviews, Meta), 7-day trial |
| Peec AI | not published | Starter, Pro, Advanced and Enterprise tiers are listed without prices; numbers appear after you create an account |
| TAMGIO | $39/mo and up | 3 engines in ongoing tracking, 4 surfaces in Audit Mode, setup included, no self-serve signup |
Inside a single vendor the same pattern repeats: Otterly.AI moves from 15 prompts at $29/mo to 100 at $189/mo and 400 at $489/mo on the same four engines, and Scrunch AI moves from 350 to 700 custom prompts between Starter and Growth. You are buying prompt volume and engine coverage, in that order.
Two conclusions follow. First, an entry tier is a measurement limit, not a discount on the same measurement: fifteen prompts on one cadence answer a smaller question than thirty-five prompts sampled repeatedly across three engines. Second, a price you cannot see is a cost you cannot plan — where pricing isn't published, budget a sales cycle before you get a number, and budget again for the seat and domain add-ons that usually sit under an enterprise quote.
Early-access pricing
- Weekly Scan3 AI engines, weekly measurement
- $39/mo
- Daily + CompetitorsDaily scan, full competitor tracking
- $99/mo
- Agency / White-labelMultiple brands, reports under your name
- $249/mo
- One-off auditPDF report + unlisted share link — 10–12 prompts × 3 LLM engines × N=2 + Google AI Overviews; prompts from your homepage or your own list. Larger volumes are priced individually.
- from $60
We do the setup — prompts, tracking, reporting.
Weigh it against ad and SEO tool spend
Paid search has a clean cost model: you pay per click or impression, and you can trace spend to a landing-page action. Classic SEO rank tracking is cheaper per data point than AI-visibility tracking, because a keyword's SERP position is comparatively stable — one crawl gives you a usable answer. AI-visibility tracking can't borrow either model. There's no click to attribute, since most AI answers are zero-click, and there's no stable position to crawl once, since non-determinism is the whole reason N-sample tracking exists. The honest way to think about ROI here is as a visibility and evidence budget, not a performance-marketing budget: what you're buying is a defensible, evidence-backed answer to how often AI engines actually mention your brand, not a guaranteed lift.
Price the cost of not knowing
The real comparison point isn't zero — it's the cost of operating with no signal on how AI answers describe your brand while competitors are being measured. TAMGIO won't tell you to expect a jump from one baseline percentage to another; no tool can honestly promise that, because the underlying answers are non-deterministic, and every formula behind TAMGIO's metrics is public rather than a black box. What a properly-sized tracking budget buys is a trustworthy, evidence-backed number you can act on — and for any single number, the raw API response and citation sitting behind it.
Frequently asked questions
- What do AI-visibility tools charge in 2026?
- Published entry prices, verified on vendor pages in September 2026, ran from $29/mo (Otterly.AI Lite: 15 prompts, 4 engines) through $99/mo (Profound Starter, ChatGPT only; Semrush AI Toolkit, $99/mo per domain billed yearly for 25 prompts) up to $399/mo (Profound Growth: ChatGPT, Perplexity and Google AI Overviews) and $250/mo (Scrunch AI Starter, billed annually, 350 custom prompts across six platforms). Peec AI publishes no numbers at all. TAMGIO's early-access pricing is public: Weekly Scan $39/mo · Daily + Competitors $99/mo · Agency / White-label $249/mo · one-off audit from $60 — setup included.
- Why do entry tiers differ so much in what they actually measure?
- Because an entry price is normally a cap on engines and prompts, not a lighter version of the same measurement. Fifteen prompts on one cadence and thirty-five prompts sampled several times across three engines produce different numbers with different reliability, so comparing monthly fees without comparing prompt count, engine count and sample size compares two different products.
- Why does AI-visibility tracking cost more per data point than a Google rank tracker?
- Because a keyword's SERP position is comparatively stable, so one crawl gives a usable answer. AI answers are non-deterministic, so a trustworthy number requires sampling the same prompt multiple times across each engine, multiplying the API calls behind every metric.
- Does tracking more engines always improve ROI?
- Not automatically. Each engine you add is a proportional cost increase, not a free bonus. The right engine count depends on which AI surfaces your actual buyers use to research and compare — tracking a surface your audience never touches adds cost without adding signal.
- Can I estimate the cost before committing to ongoing tracking?
- Yes — a one-time Audit Mode scan runs once (10–12 prompts × 3 LLM engines × N=2 + Google AI Overviews) and produces a report and PDF, so you get a first read on your visibility before budgeting for a recurring project.
- Why won't TAMGIO quote a specific ROI percentage?
- Because AI answers are non-deterministic, no tool can honestly promise a move from one percentage to another. TAMGIO reports N-sample proxy measures with the raw evidence behind every number instead of a black-box score.
- How much does sample size actually change the bill?
- Linearly — sampling a prompt three times instead of once roughly triples the API calls behind that prompt's metrics. Too few samples make the resulting rate statistically unreliable, regardless of price.
