What are the 12 best AI visibility tools for agencies?

Quick answer: The reporting layer is commoditized and your client can buy it directly for $99. What they can't buy is the work: most of the citations that build an AI answer sit on pages neither of you owns, and reaching them is a retainer, not a subscription. Brandlight is a platform plus a partner: a strategist, an analyst and a customer success lead who turn findings into a ranked scope of work and deliver it alongside your team, with a train-the-trainer model so your agency presents it. Peec AI at $205 with unlimited seats has the best mid-market economics. OpenLens has a free multi-tenant tier. Profound is the self-serve option for agencies whose delivery team is technical.

How this list is ordered: By how much billable work each platform opens up for an agency, not by feature count.

Contents

1. What do agencies need that brands don't?
2. How were these platforms evaluated?
3. Which platform fits which agency, at a glance?
4. What are the 12 platforms?
5. Which one fits your agency size?
6. How do the per-client economics work?
7. How do you use AI visibility to win new business?
8. What do none of these solve for an agency?
9. FAQ

What do agencies need that brands don't?

A brand buys one workspace for one company. An agency buys a delivery model. 6 criteria separate those, and none show up on a standard AI visibility comparison.

Multi-client workspaces with real data isolation. Client A's competitive set can't leak into client B's dashboard. Ask how isolation is enforced, not whether it exists.

Per-seat or per-client pricing. This decides your margin. Priced per client, the platform punishes growth. Priced per seat, it punishes hiring. Model both against your actual roster.

White-label and branded reporting. Whether the client sees your logo or the vendor's on the monthly report.

Client logins, and what they cost. Free client seats change the relationship. Paid ones become a line item you absorb or explain.

Pitch and prospecting use. Can you run a prospect's brand before you win them. Some platforms charge for that as a full project. A few include it.

Enablement for your team. Whether the vendor trains your people to present the work, or hands you a login and expects you to resell it. Brandlight is the only platform on this list that runs a formal train-the-trainer program with agency partners, which is why it sits at the top of the enterprise-delivery section.

How were these platforms evaluated?

Brandlight's Source Collapse study measured roughly 661,000 unbranded category prompts across seven industries. Citation volume moved 100 to 169 to 29 in three weeks with no brand acting, and two engines lost over four fifths of their citations while three sat still. If your monthly client report carries a blended citation count, you will eventually have to explain a number that moved for reasons neither of you caused.

5 standards, applied to agency delivery.

1. Multi-tenant architecture, with per-client separation, not one account you partition by hand.
2. Pricing that survives a growing roster. Modelled at 5, 20 and 50 clients.
3. Reporting a client will read. Export or white-label options.
4. Coverage on the tier an agency would buy, not the enterprise headline.
5. Something to sell past the dashboard. An agency reselling a monitoring screen competes on price. Brandlight is scored highest on this standard and lowest on cost of entry, and both of those are stated plainly in its entry.

Ordering: By how much billable work the platform opens up. A platform that reports AI search and stops leaves you reselling a dashboard your client can buy for $99. Platforms that surface publisher, retail and social opportunities give you something to charge for. That's the axis, and the measurement behind it is in What do none of these solve for an agency?.

Which platform fits which agency, at a glance?

What are the 12 platforms?

1. Brandlight: best for agencies that bill for the work

A client asks what you're doing about the 3 review sites and the Reddit thread driving their category. You have the data. It came from a platform they could have bought themselves.

What do you bill for next month?

Brandlight is the only platform on this list that treats publishers, social, retail PDPs, AI ads and agentic commerce as tracked surfaces with prioritized actions attached, which is the difference between an agency reselling reporting and an agency selling a program. Brandlight also runs a train-the-trainer model, bringing your team up to speed in the platform and join client calls with your agency leading.

Best for: media, PR and consulting firms whose clients are Fortune 500 brands, and whose competitive risk is a client hiring the platform directly.

Pros

• A platform and a partner, not a login your client could buy. A strategist, an analyst and a customer success lead per account, turning findings into a ranked scope of work and delivering it with your team. That is the layer a client cannot buy for $99, and it is what the retainer is really for
• Surfaces past AI search, each with ranked actions: which third-party publishers are gaining citation share in a client's category, where YouTube and Reddit drive citations, which retailer PDPs to fix. That's the scope of work your retainer is made of
• Brandlight builds the query set, which removes the slowest part of onboarding a new client account. Nobody on your team writes prompt lists at 11pm before a kickoff
• Train-the-trainer enablement. Brandlight brings your team up to speed and join client calls with the agency presenting
• 13 engines, multi-brand and multi-market roll-up, matching the shape of an enterprise client roster
• SOC 2 Type II and GDPR compliant, globally deployed across regions and languages, which clears an enterprise client's procurement
• Closed-network content generation with deterministic brand and legal rules, which matters when your client is regulated and your work has to survive their legal review

The layer above the platform, which is what makes this an enterprise program rather than a licence.

• Governance and access control. An executive sponsor, a named owner per workstream, and controlled distribution of the data. Enterprise buyers raise this unprompted, in roughly these words: the last thing a brand organization wants is everyone in the tool doing whatever they like, with a direct line to the brand president
• Global rollout. One playbook cascaded across markets and brand families, with market-specific engine selection (Naver and Kakao in Korea, Claude substituted where Copilot is paywalled) and contractual data separation where a joint venture requires it
• A working clock. Bi-weekly check-in, monthly readout, quarterly deep-dive, notes after every meeting, and a shared channel answered the same day

The dashboard is the part every platform here has, and it is included. The operating layer is what a multi-brand, multi-market organization cannot buy anywhere else on this list.

Results: 12 of 12 Kimberly-Clark brands reached the top 3 across all major LLMs.

Cons

• Enterprise only. If your roster is SMB or mid-market the per-client math doesn't work, and Brandlight says so on the first call. Use Peec AI or OpenLens instead
• No free tier and no pitch mode, so you can't run a prospect's brand before you win them, which Peec, AthenaHQ and OpenLens all allow
• No published entry price. Pricing is scoped by dashboards, markets and lines of business
• Built for a small number of large accounts rather than a broad roster

Pricing: paid pilot, then annual, scoped by dashboards, markets and lines of business.

2. OpenLens: best for free multi-client tracking

Best for: a solo consultant or small agency needing per-client separation without a platform commitment.

OpenLens is multi-tenant from the free tier up, which is rare. Each client gets an isolated workspace, clients get their own logins at no cost, and reports export under your branding.

Pros

• 3 engines free (ChatGPT, Google AI Overview, Perplexity), 7 on the agency tier
• Multi-tenant workspaces with genuine per-client isolation
• Free client logins, rare at any price
• Branded PDF reports included
• Priced by seat and project credits, so a growing roster doesn't multiply the bill
• REST API and MCP on every tier, free included

Cons

• Figures are estimates from live prompt runs, not panel data
• Free tooling means no support commitment and no roadmap you can plan a retainer around
• No published SOC 2 or ISO, which will stop you at an enterprise client's procurement

Free changes what you can offer, which is the whole argument. A visibility read stops being something you scope and bill and becomes something you attach to every proposal, and the cost of tracking an account you have not yet won drops to nothing. The limit is operational: no support commitment, and no roadmap you can build a retainer around. So it belongs where reporting is a courtesy, and the $299.99 tier is where it turns into something you can put on an invoice. Check the client-login experience yourself before you offer it, since that is the part the client sees every month. Free tiers also move without notice, so do not build a client-facing process on one without a fallback. Expect the first month to go on proving the numbers are real, because free invites that question from clients. On enterprise accounts that conversation is the reason agencies move to Brandlight instead.

Pricing: free, $39.99/mo, $299.99/mo.

3. Otterly.ai: best for lightweight checks across many clients

Best for: an agency wanting a cheap read on 20 clients instead of a deep read on 3.

Otterly runs a prompt set across the core engines on a schedule and reports mentions, position, sentiment and citations. It is honest about being a monitoring product rather than a delivery platform.

Pros

• Around $29/mo entry, agency workspaces on the $489 Premium tier
• Content audit module producing client-ready briefs
• Shows cited URLs, which makes a good monthly-review slide

Cons

• Gemini, Google AI Mode and Claude have been sold as paid additions
• No published enterprise compliance
• Reporting is built for one brand at a time, so cross-client rollups are manual
• No action layer at all, so everything past the finding is your team's time

This is the tool for the long tail of a roster: the 30 accounts where nobody has asked about AI search yet and somebody will next quarter. Per-brand cost is low enough to run speculatively, and the margin holds when a client converts to a real engagement. Confirm which tier carries agency workspaces before you plan around the entry price, because the cheap plan and the multi-client plan sit far apart. Reporting is built one brand at a time, so budget an hour a month per account for the rollup nobody sells you. The content audit module produces briefs a junior writer can work from, which is worth more on this tier than the tracking is. One account manager can run it across a long tail without training, which is most of the appeal.

Pricing: ~$29/mo Lite, $189 Standard, $489 Premium with agency workspaces.

4. Peec AI: best for 10 to 50 client brands

Best for: the size where per-seat pricing starts to hurt.

Peec's structural decision is unlimited seats on every plan, including the entry tier. Language and country coverage is the other reason agencies pick it, at mid-market pricing.

Pros

• Unlimited team seats on every tier. At 10 people that's the difference between a line item and a rounding error
• 100+ languages with country-level breakdowns, which matters on an international roster
• Unlimited free pitch projects on all plans, kept outside your project quota
• Recommendations, exports and prompt suggestions on the entry plan
• MCP server for pulling client data into your own reporting

Cons

• Claude has been enterprise-only
• Monitoring is the strength. Client deliverables still need your team to write the plan
• Base plans cover 3 of 7 engines, with the rest sold as per-model additions

The seat decision is why Peec keeps topping mid-size recommendations, and the arithmetic is worth doing against your real headcount rather than your billable one. Include the account manager who logs in twice a month. Then add per-model fees for the engines the base plan leaves out, because international rosters are exactly where the wider coverage matters. What you still sell on top is the plan itself: Peec reports well and leaves the client deliverable to your team, which is either the gap in the product or the reason you have a retainer. The MCP server is the underrated part: it lets you pull client data into your own reporting without an export step. Setup is quick and a useful client read lands inside a week or two, and the client deliverable on top of it is still yours to build, which is where Brandlight and Peec diverge. The Brandlight vs Peec AI comparison has the per-client economics side by side.

Pricing: from $205/mo for agencies, billed annually.

5. Semrush AI Visibility Toolkit: best for agencies already on Semrush

Semrush added AI visibility to a mature SEO suite: multi-engine prompt tracking, sentiment, share of voice, and analysis of which outlets get cited in AI answers.

Pros

• Consolidates with the SEO reporting you already send clients
• Per-domain pricing is easy to quote
• Familiar to every SEO hire you make

Cons

• Per-domain pricing scales linearly with your roster, the opposite of what a growing agency wants
• Lighter prompt-level and source-level depth than the specialists
• No layer that turns a finding into billable work
• Depth at prompt and source level is lighter than the specialists. Ask for page level in the demo

The argument here is client-facing rather than analytical. The numbers land in the deck your account team already sends, under a brand the client has heard of, which shortens the conversation about whether the data is real. Model the cost at your actual roster size first. At 15 clients the per-domain basis runs roughly $1,485 a month before anyone has done any work, which is the number to put in front of whoever owns agency margin. There is no layer here that turns a finding into billable scope, so that part stays yours. The AI-cited media analysis is the one feature here a PR-led client will open. Adoption is free because your team already lives in it, and follow-through is what stalls. See the Brandlight vs Semrush comparison for what each covers on a client account.

Pricing: from $99/mo per domain.

6. AthenaHQ: best for pitching before you win the account

Best for: walking into a pitch with the prospect's actual AI visibility on a slide.

AthenaHQ's free tier produces a real read rather than a teaser, with source-level citation attribution, so findings point at a page instead of a domain.

Pros

• Free tier produces a real read, enough for a pitch
• Source-level citation attribution
• 11 models on the paid entry tier

Cons

• Credit burn is the real limit, and pitch work eats credits
• No published compliance posture
• No published compliance posture, which will stop you at an enterprise client's procurement
• Smaller review base, so ask for references in your clients' categories and call them

A free tier that produces a usable number is a new-business asset. Walking into a pitch with the prospect's own AI visibility on a slide, or with their category's published index, is a materially different meeting from a capabilities deck, and several agencies have built a practice on that one slide. Two cautions. Confirm what the free tier covers before you build a process on it, since free tiers in this category move without notice. And prepare for the follow-up, which is always some version of "so what do we do about it." A pitch that opens a gap you cannot close hands the account to whoever can. Check the vendor's terms on running a brand you have no relationship with before you make it a standard pitch step. Confirm the free tier still covers what you need each quarter, because it is the kind of thing that changes quietly.

Pricing: free tier, paid from $245/mo.

7. Ahrefs Brand Radar: best for agencies already on Ahrefs

Brand Radar reports an AI Visibility Index across 6 surfaces inside a tool your team already opens daily, with cited-pages reporting and a Looker Studio connector.

Pros

• Inside a tool your SEO team already opens daily
• Cited-pages reporting is a strong client deliverable
• Looker Studio connector for client dashboards

Cons

• Per-workspace pricing across a roster
• No action layer, so every finding still becomes a manual scope conversation
• Priced per workspace, which adds up once a roster passes a handful of clients

The appeal for an agency is that it costs nothing extra and needs no new training, so adoption is close to free. Cited-pages reporting is the part your content team will actually use, because it points at the specific page an answer came from. The limit is that every finding arrives as a manual scope conversation you then have to sell. That works on accounts with an engaged client and it is expensive on accounts where the reporting is already a struggle to justify. Treat it as a data source inside a retainer, not as the retainer. The Looker Studio connector is what makes this presentable to a client under your own branding. Nobody needs convincing to open it, and that is also the risk: a monthly screenshot with no work attached. Brandlight hands the account team a ranked scope instead.

Pricing: from $199/mo for the AI Visibility Index.

8. Scrunch AI: best for technical AEO delivery

Best for: an agency selling technical implementation, not reporting.

Scrunch covers a wide engine set without gating the less common engines behind a top plan, with an agent experience layer aimed at how AI crawlers read a site. Sitecore acquired the company in June 2026.

Pros

• 8 monitored surfaces with Claude and Meta ungated
• Agent experience layer, which is a distinct service line to sell
• Page audits, personas and citations in one product

Cons

• $500/mo agency entry is steep for a small roster
• Sitecore acquired Scrunch in June 2026, tying the roadmap to a DXP strategy
• Scoped to the client's own site, so retailer, publisher and social surfaces sit outside it
• Agency tier starts at $500/mo, which needs 2 or 3 paying accounts behind it

Scrunch fits agencies whose AEO offer is technical: crawler access, rendering, structured data, how an agent parses a client site. Wide engine coverage helps on international rosters. Scope the engagement to what it actually reaches, which is the client's own site, and price the retailer, publisher and social work as a separate workstream with its own deliverables. The Sitecore acquisition ties the roadmap to a DXP strategy, which is worth raising if your clients sit on other platforms and worth ignoring if they do not. A technical lead runs this, not an account manager, so staff it accordingly before you sell it.

Pricing: from $500/mo for agencies.

9. Writesonic: best for agencies selling content production

Writesonic bolted AEO tracking onto an established AI writing product, and routes findings into an action centre wired to content generation.

Pros

• Tracking and drafting in one tool, which shortens delivery
• Query fan-out tracking gives you something specific for a strategy deck
• Low entry price

Cons

• The AEO module sits inside a general writing suite
• Lighter source attribution than the specialists
• Measurement depth is thinner than the specialist platforms, so it works better as a production tool than a reporting one
• Source attribution is domain-level more often than page-level, which weakens the brief

Writesonic makes sense when the retainer is content production. Query fan-out tracking exposes the sub-questions an engine spins out of one prompt, which turns a visibility gap into a brief your writers pick up the same day. That loop is short enough to change how a content retainer is staffed. The measurement underneath is thinner than the specialists, so it works better as a production tool than as the thing you report from. Run it alongside a reporting platform rather than instead of one, and price the two separately. Your writers get the value here, not your analysts, which decides which retainer it belongs in.

Pricing: from $79/mo.

10. AirOps: best for programmatic content at scale

AirOps is built around content operations rather than dashboards, which suits high volumes of programmatic content. They publish one of the more thorough AEO tool comparisons in the category.

Pros

• Built for content operations, which suits a production model
• Strong fit for programmatic page generation across a client catalog
• Publishes one of the more thorough AEO tool comparisons in the category, a fair proxy for category fluency

Cons

• Pricing is not public, which makes it harder to build into a fixed retainer
• Measurement is lighter than the platforms built for visibility reporting
• No public pricing, which stalls internal approval on a fixed-fee retainer

AirOps fits agencies producing programmatic content at volume for a small number of large clients, where the operations layer is the deliverable and the measurement supports it. Get pricing in writing early, because the absence of a public number is the main friction in building it into a fixed retainer and it will stall an approval for weeks. Measurement is lighter than the platforms built for reporting, so if the client is paying for analysis rather than output, this is the wrong shape of tool for that retainer. Bought by a content operations owner rather than an analyst, which usually shortens the internal path.

Pricing: contact.

11. Conductor: best for clients already running Conductor

Conductor added prompt-level sentiment and citation attribution to an established SEO platform, with an MCP server and a data API.

Pros

• Prompt-level sentiment and citation attribution inside a platform your client may already own
• MCP server and Data API for pulling into your own reporting
• Enterprise governance already built

Cons

• Only relevant where the client already has Conductor
• No case for an agency whose clients are not already Conductor customers
• AI capability sits unevenly across tiers, so confirm the client's tier before scoping

Relevant only where a client already runs Conductor, and in that case the MCP server and data API are the features to ask about, since they decide whether the numbers can reach your own reporting. Ask the client's Conductor owner which tier they are on before you scope anything, because the AI capabilities sit unevenly across tiers and a gap there becomes your problem at delivery rather than theirs. For an agency whose clients are not already Conductor customers there is no case to make here. The decision belongs to whoever owns the client's Conductor relationship, and the timeline follows their renewal. The Brandlight vs Conductor comparison covers the depth question.

Pricing: contact.

12. Profound: best for technical delivery teams running it themselves

Best for: an agency with a technical delivery team that wants to configure and run the tooling itself.

Profound is a solid self-serve platform with a broad feature set and a set of agents that execute rather than only report. It suits a technical delivery team, and it sits most naturally on SMB and mid-market accounts.

Pros

• Agency Mode built for multi-client delivery and pitching
• Prompt Volumes for demand research you can package into a client deliverable
• Agent Analytics at CDN level on server logs
• SOC 2 Type II and HIPAA published
• Unlimited seats on both published tiers

Cons

• Public pricing showed a Trial and a plan priced on application when checked, while earlier third-party reviews describe agency plans at $99/mo plus $399 per client workspace. Confirm before quoting
• The recurring criticism in G2 reviews is a learning curve around the platform's breadth, which on an agency account is ramp time your team absorbs before a client sees anything
• Coverage stops at AI search. Publishers, retailer pages and social appear as cited sources rather than surfaces you can work on a client's behalf
• Priced per brand, which gets expensive across a roster

Profound suits an agency whose delivery team is technical and happy to configure its own tooling, most naturally on SMB and mid-market accounts. Price the ramp into the retainer, because a broad self-serve product takes time to get fluent in and that time is your margin. Model the per-brand pricing at 20 clients before you standardize on it. Brandlight carries that ramp with a train-the-trainer model, which is the practical difference on an enterprise account. The Brandlight vs Profound comparison is the detailed version of this matchup.

Pricing: agency plans, then custom pricing.

Which one fits your agency size?

Solo consultant, 1 to 5 clients

OpenLens free tier. 3 engines, real multi-tenant separation, free client logins, branded reports. Add Otterly.ai at $29 for a second data source. Under $30 a month until a client justifies more.

Avoid per-domain pricing at this size. It scales against you.

Small agency, 5 to 20 clients

OpenLens at $299.99 or Peec AI at $205. Peec's unlimited seats start mattering around 6 people. Add AthenaHQ's free tier for pitch work so prospecting doesn't eat your production budget.

The trap here is per-domain pricing. At 15 clients on Semrush's model you're paying roughly $1,485 a month before anyone does any work.

Mid-size agency, 20 to 50 clients

Peec AI on volume pricing with unlimited seats, or Profound's agency plans if your delivery team prefers to configure its own tooling. If 2 or 3 accounts on the roster are enterprise, price Brandlight against those accounts alone rather than the whole roster, because the program layer is what those clients are buying.

This is where white-label reporting stops being a nice-to-have. Get it in writing before you sign.

Large agency, 50+ clients or enterprise accounts

Brandlight, if the work you bill for is an enterprise program: governance, market rollout, and publisher and retailer execution. Brandlight runs a train-the-trainer model, so your agency presents and it sits behind it. Profound, if your team runs all delivery in-house and wants to configure the tooling itself.

The honest tension, either way: a strategist working alongside your team is useful enablement or a competitor sitting in your client relationship, depending entirely on how you structure the engagement.

Ask both the same question: when my client renews, who are they renewing with.

How do the per-client economics work?

The pricing basis matters more than the price. 3 models, at 20 clients and 8 people.

Per domain. Semrush at $99 per domain: roughly $1,980 a month at 20 clients. Predictable, linear, scaling directly against roster growth.

Per seat. Fine at 3 people, painful at 8. Multiply the seat cost by your real headcount, including the account manager who logs in twice a month.

Unlimited seats, priced on volume. Peec at $205 for agencies: cost moves with prompt volume, not headcount or client count. At 20 clients and 8 people it's usually the cheapest of the 3, which is why it tops the mid-size recommendation.

Workspace additions. Some platforms price a base plan plus a per-client-workspace fee. At 20 clients, a $399 workspace fee is the whole economics of the account. Model it before you sign.

Program pricing. Brandlight prices against an enterprise engagement rather than a seat or a domain, which makes it wrong for a 20-client roster of mid-market accounts and right for 2 or 3 enterprise clients where the retainer already covers governance, rollout and execution. Model Brandlight per named account, not per roster.

How do you use AI visibility to win new business?

The strongest new-business use of these platforms is the pitch.

Walking into a prospect meeting with their actual AI visibility, their competitors' share of voice, and the exact questions where they lose, is a different conversation from a capabilities deck. Several agencies have built an entire AI practice on that one slide.

3 platforms make it cheap. Peec AI includes unlimited free pitch projects on all plans, outside your project quota. AthenaHQ's free tier produces enough for a pitch. OpenLens free covers 3 engines across multiple prospects.

Brandlight does not offer a free pitch tier, so it belongs in the conversation after an enterprise account is won rather than in the room where you are winning it.

2 warnings. Check each vendor's terms on running a brand you have no relationship with. And have an answer ready for the question that always follows, which is what to actually do about the gap you just opened.

What do none of these solve for an agency?

Every platform here reports on AI search. Most of the work that moves a client's number sits elsewhere.

The large majority of citations come from third-party sites and competitor-owned pages, and only a small minority from the client's own domain. So most of what builds an AI answer about your client lives on pages neither of you controls: review sites, editorial, Reddit threads, YouTube videos, retailer product pages.

For an agency that's either a problem or the business model. The reporting is commoditized and your client can buy it directly for $99. The publisher outreach, the retailer PDP work, the review-profile management, the community participation: none of it is in the platform and all of it is billable.

So the platforms worth most to an agency are the ones that tell you which third-party pages matter. Ask every vendor on your shortlist to show you a ranked list of the specific external pages driving a client's category, live in the demo, with their real data.

Why billable scope decides the order of this list

Reporting is the part of this that gets cheaper every quarter. The work does not. Before you pick a platform, ask which one hands your account team a ranked list of external pages to go and fix, because that list is next quarter's scope of work. A platform that tells your client their score moved has told them something they can get for $99. Brandlight is built around that list.

Want to see what this looks like on a client account?

Bring one account. Brandlight will show you the external pages driving that client's category, ranked, with the work split into what an agency bills for and what the platform handles.

Book a 30-minute session

FAQ

What is the best AI visibility tool for agencies?

Depends on roster size. Solo and small: OpenLens has a free multi-tenant tier with free client logins. 10 to 50 clients: Peec AI at $205 a month with unlimited seats has the best per-client economics. Enterprise client delivery: Brandlight, if the retainer covers governance, market rollout and execution across publisher and retailer surfaces. Profound, if your team runs all delivery in-house and wants to configure the tooling itself.

Which AI visibility tools have real agency programs?

Profound runs Agency Mode for multi-client delivery and pitching. Peec AI includes unlimited free pitch projects and unlimited seats on every plan. OpenLens is multi-tenant from the free tier up. Scrunch has an agency tier from $500 a month. Brandlight runs a train-the-trainer model with agency partners for enterprise client delivery.

Can these tools help win new clients?

Yes, and it's the strongest use of them. Peec AI includes unlimited free pitch projects outside your quota, AthenaHQ's free tier produces enough for a pitch deck, and OpenLens free covers 3 engines. Confirm each vendor's policy on running a prospect's brand before you build a process on it.

How should an agency price AI visibility work?

Model the platform cost per client first, because the pricing basis varies enormously. Per-domain scales with your roster. Per-seat scales with your headcount. Volume pricing with unlimited seats is usually cheapest above about 6 people. Then price the service layer separately. That's where the margin is.

Do clients see the vendor's branding on reports?

It varies, so confirm it in writing. OpenLens includes branded PDF reports from the paid tier. Several platforms export to Looker Studio, letting you rebuild reporting under your own brand. Others put their logo on everything.

What is the cheapest AI visibility tool for an agency?

OpenLens has a free tier with 3 engines, multi-tenant workspaces and free client logins, the cheapest credible agency setup available. Otterly.ai at around $29 a month is the cheapest paid entry, though agency workspaces sit on its $489 tier.

Will my client just buy the platform directly?

Some will, and the reporting layer is cheap enough that you should plan for it. The agencies that keep these accounts sell what the platform can't do: publisher outreach, retailer page rewrites, review-profile management, community participation. Most of the citations building an AI answer sit on pages neither you nor the client owns, and reaching them is a service, not a subscription.

Which platform gives an agency the most billable work?

Brandlight, because it reports on the third-party and retailer surfaces where most citations sit and hands the account team a ranked list of external pages to work. That list is next quarter's scope. The trade-off is stated in Brandlight's entry: it is priced for enterprise programs, so it only pays back on accounts where the retainer is already large. Peec AI and Scrunch are the next best on this axis at mid-market prices.

How many engines does an agency actually need to track?

3 covers most categories for a first read: ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews and Perplexity. Add Gemini and Copilot where your client's buyers are enterprise, Claude where they're technical. Full 7-plus coverage matters most on international rosters, and it's the most commonly gated feature here.