Best Tools to Track Competitor Share of Voice in ChatGPT

You typed your category into ChatGPT, asked the question a buyer would ask, and watched a competitor get named instead of you. That stings. Take a breath, because you can measure this now, and measuring it is the first real step to fixing it.

The tricky part is that most tools show you one brand: yours. That is a mirror, not a scoreboard. What you actually need for chatgpt competitor tracking is a relative number, a share of voice ChatGPT benchmark that shows how often you get named against the specific rivals you care about, on the exact prompts your buyers send.

This guide compares four platforms built for chatgpt competitor tracking: DeepSmith, Profound, Peec AI, and Otterly AI. Each one lets you define a competitor set and see who wins inside ChatGPT answers, not just whether you showed up at all. Each one turns a vague "we feel invisible" into a number you can watch move. Let's find the one that fits your team and your budget.

How we picked these four tools

A "best tools" list is only useful if you know how the picks were made. Here are the criteria, in the order that matters for competitor AI visibility ChatGPT work.

• ChatGPT is a named, tracked engine, and the tool shows a relative competitor benchmark. A single-brand dashboard does not qualify. You need to see yourself ranked against named peers.
• Share of voice is a top-level surface with a disclosed method. A number you can act on, ideally with the formula written down somewhere you can read it.
• Per-prompt competitor resolution. For any tracked prompt, the tool credits mentions and citations to specific competitors, so you know which rival is beating you and where.
• Citation tracking alongside mention tracking. The two signals mean different things, and you want both.
• Clear per-month pricing. Real dollar tiers you can size a budget against, not a "book a demo" wall.
• A sensible ChatGPT-only starting mode. You can begin with ChatGPT and add Perplexity or Gemini later without rebuilding your workspace.

Every tool below meets the core bar. They differ on price, engine coverage, and whether they help you do anything about the gaps they find.

The four tools at a glance

Start here, then read the detailed entries for the tool or two that fit your situation.

1. DeepSmith

Best for: marketing leads who want ChatGPT-first entry pricing, explicit competitor share-of-voice numbers, and a way to turn the gaps they find into published content without buying a second tool.

DeepSmith is an AI search analytics platform fused with a content production system. The idea behind it is simple and a little bit clever: the same data that shows where you lose on ChatGPT should also produce the articles that close the gap. One platform for AI search analytics and content production, as the site puts it.

For competitor tracking specifically, the AEO module has a dedicated Competitors view. It surfaces how your brand ranks against the rivals you track, using three metrics side by side: mention rate (how often ChatGPT names you), citation rate (how often it links to your pages as a source), and share of voice (your visibility relative to those competitors). The Prompts and Pages surfaces extend to the competitor level too, so you can see the exact competitor URLs winning citations on a given prompt. That is the level of ChatGPT competitive analysis most teams are missing.

Here is what sets it apart from the other three. When you find a prompt where a competitor is beating you, the Writer can take that prompt and produce a finished, publish-ready article to answer it, with internal links, a cover image, and AEO formatting already built in. Autowrite can schedule that work hands-off. The Content Intelligence module tracks what your competitors publish as it ships, with their full page history, and the Remix feature turns a competitor page that is working into ideas in your own Idea Bank. So the loop is closed: you measure the gap, then you close it, on the same data, in the same place.

This matters more than it sounds. With the other three tools, competitor AI visibility ChatGPT reporting ends at the chart. You learn you are losing, then you open a separate tool, brief a writer, and wait. With DeepSmith, the finding and the fix live together, which is the difference between a dashboard you check and a system that moves your numbers.

Pricing is public and tiered, which matters when you are comparing cost per month rather than sitting through a sales call.

Annual billing lowers the effective monthly rate, and there is a 7-day free trial with real data and real drafts before you pay. No long-term contracts, no cancellation fees. Pro at $99/mo tracks ChatGPT with 50 prompts, the highest prompt ceiling of any first-tier-priced tool on this list. Grow adds Perplexity, Scale adds Gemini, and Enterprise unlocks all five engines: ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Claude, and Google AI Mode.

The tracked metrics are the four you want on a competitor dashboard: Mention Rate, Citation Rate, Share of Voice, and Visibility Trend over time. When a draft is ready, you can publish straight to WordPress, Strapi, Webflow, or your own webhooks, with Markdown and HTML export as a fallback.

One honest limitation. ChatGPT is the only engine on the $99 Pro tier. If you need Perplexity from day one, that is the $199 Grow plan. Claude and Google AI Mode live on Enterprise, which is custom-priced, and those are engines a sophisticated team often wants within six months. If your plan is to run five engines at once from the start, price the higher tiers before you commit.

2. Profound

Best for: in-house marketing orgs that want the deepest engine coverage available and a public benchmark to reference in leadership conversations.

Profound positions itself as a full-stack marketing platform for AI search, organized around Monitor, Create, Operate, and Aim. For competitor benchmarking, the work lives in Monitor, next to Answer Engine Insights and Prompt Volumes.

Its standout strength is breadth. Profound names nine engines: Perplexity, ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Grok, Microsoft Copilot, Meta AI, DeepSeek, and Google AI Overviews. That is wider coverage than anything else here. Its Agent Analytics goes a step further and tracks how ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and Perplexity actually crawl your site, which is closer to server-log visibility into AI than the other tools offer. Prompt Volumes shows what real users are asking AI, so you can benchmark against competitors on the prompts people genuinely send.

There is also a free asset worth knowing about even if you never buy the product. The Profound Index is a public leaderboard that ranks brands within a category using real consumer prompts, drawn from anonymized opt-in panels and refreshed weekly. It draws on more than 1.5 billion real user prompts. That gives you a category reference point you can cite in a board deck before you spend a dollar.

Pricing. Plans start at $499/mo, with no free plan and no public per-tier breakdown. You need a demo to see exactly what each tier includes.

One honest limitation. The entry price sits at enterprise scale and there is no free trial, the opposite of a $99 or $29 starting point. Profound also spreads well beyond pure competitor tracking, into shopping visibility and agent workflows, so a team that only wants ChatGPT competitor benchmarking against named peers is paying for surface area it may not touch.

3. Peec AI

Best for: teams that want a named, published share-of-voice formula and a low dollar entry, and are happy starting with ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Gemini.

Peec AI markets itself as AI search analytics for marketing teams. It measures brand performance across ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Gemini, and lets you track visibility, benchmark competitors, and work on your AI search presence.

The reason Peec earns a spot is transparency about method. Its docs publish the share-of-voice formula in plain writing: your mention count divided by total mentions across all tracked brands, including yourself. The worked example makes it concrete: four mentions for you and twelve for a competitor gives you a 25 percent share of voice. When a tool is willing to show its math, you can trust the number more, and you can explain it to your boss. On every tracked prompt, Peec surfaces Visibility, Position, Sentiment, and Share of Voice, plus brand mentions and impressions. Its Discover Prompts feature surfaces prompts you have not tracked yet, which is handy when you are hunting for where a competitor quietly wins.

Pricing. The brand-side plan starts at $35/mo for Starter, with three models, one project, and daily tracking. Higher tiers add projects and countries, and an Enterprise tier adds Looker integration, API access, SSO, and custom onboarding. There is a separate agency ladder for multi-brand tracking, with tiers landing around $245/mo and up for agencies running several client workspaces. Dollar figures live on a sign-up funnel rather than a clean public table, so check the pricing page for current numbers.

One honest limitation. Engine coverage stops at ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Gemini on the standard plans. If you need Claude or Google AI Mode, you are looking at enterprise or plan expansion. And because the per-tier dollars sit behind a funnel, a clean side-by-side cost comparison takes a little more digging than with a fully public pricing page.

4. Otterly AI

Best for: solo marketers or agencies that want the cheapest way to start tracking ChatGPT competitor signals and to layer more engines in later.

Otterly AI is AI search monitoring framed as generative engine optimization software. Out of the box it tracks ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, Perplexity, and Microsoft Copilot, and it reports the four metrics that matter for competitor work together: visibility percent, sentiment score, position, and the specific competitors that appear alongside you on each tracked prompt.

The pull here is the entry price. The Lite plan is $29/mo with 15 prompts, the lowest cost start of the four, and it still includes a monthly ceiling of GEO URL audits so you can pre-check a site before committing to more spend.

Pricing. Lite is $29/mo (15 prompts), Standard is $189/mo (100 prompts), and Premium is $489/mo (400 prompts), with 15 percent off on annual billing. All plans include daily tracking, unlimited brand reports, unlimited team members, and multi-country support.

One honest limitation. Google AI Mode, Google Gemini, and Claude are paid add-ons on every plan, even at the Premium tier. If you want full engine parity in one workspace, the add-ons stack on top of your base price, and the four-engine base is narrower than what Profound or a top DeepSmith tier covers. Read the add-on math before you assume the $29 number is the whole bill.

What "share of voice" actually means in ChatGPT

Before you buy anything, it helps to know what the number on the dashboard is really telling you. This is the part most guides skip, and it is where teams misread their own data.

There are two ways to calculate share of voice, and good tools are clear about which one they use. Mention-based share of voice is your mentions divided by the total mentions across every brand you track, on the same prompt set. That is the Peec method, and it is the ChatGPT-native default, for a good reason we will get to. Citation-based share of voice is your citations divided by total citations across those prompts, which frames the metric as your share of the authoritative sources feeding AI answers.

Why does the mention version dominate on ChatGPT? Because ChatGPT cites external links in only about 31 percent of its responses, while Perplexity and Copilot cite sources in more than 77 percent. So a ChatGPT tool that scores you on citations alone will undercount how often you actually show up. On ChatGPT, mentions are the truer signal.

A few reference points so your number means something:

• Most B2B brands appear in under 30 percent of the category queries that matter to them. If your share of voice ChatGPT reading looks low, you are in normal company. Take heart, and keep going.
• Context sets the bar. In a two-player category, 50 percent is parity. In a category with ten real alternatives, 15 percent can already mean you lead.
• As a rough industry read: under 15 percent signals a real gap, 25 to 40 percent is a competitive range in most categories, and above 40 percent is strong. Numbers above 60 percent are rare, because AI tends to diversify the sources it cites.

Two habits will keep you honest. First, run, do not survey: the same prompt can return different brands on different runs, so a single manual ChatGPT search is unreliable. Aim for around five runs per prompt on your core set and eight to ten on your most important prompts, on a monthly cadence, starting with 25 to 50 prompts. This is exactly the sampling work a tool does for you, and it is why manual spot-checks in a browser tab keep leading teams astray. Second, always read share of voice next to sentiment. A brand can hit 60 percent share of voice while being framed badly, and a high-mention, low-sentiment display can cost you more than being invisible. Reading the two numbers together is what turns raw tracking into real ChatGPT competitive analysis you can act on.

How to choose the right tool

There is no single winner here. There is a winner for your situation. Good chatgpt competitor tracking is less about the flashiest feature list and more about matching the tool to how your team actually works and what you plan to do with the data. Here is the honest map.

Pick DeepSmith if you want to start on ChatGPT with public per-month pricing, get explicit competitor share-of-voice numbers, and then close the gaps you find without buying a separate writing tool. Pro at $99/mo is the right entry for a lean team; Grow and Scale add Perplexity and Gemini when you are ready. This is the fit when measurement is step one and content production is step two, and you would rather run both on one platform. If your ChatGPT competitive analysis is going to feed a content plan, one connected system saves you the handoff.

Pick Otterly Lite if you are a solo marketer or a small agency and you want the cheapest ChatGPT-first tracker at $29/mo. Just remember that AI Mode, Gemini, and Claude cost extra.

Pick Profound if you run an in-house org that wants the widest engine coverage, and you value the public Profound Index as a benchmark for leadership conversations. Budget from $499/mo.

Pick Peec AI if a published, named share-of-voice formula matters to you and you want a low $35/mo brand entry on ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Gemini. Its agency tiers fit shops running several client workspaces.

One more thing before you sign anything: define your competitor set first. Every tool here needs a list. Pre-pick 5 to 10 rivals per topic cluster so you do not waste prompt credits discovering that on the fly.

None of these tools guarantees rankings, citations, or traffic, and any that implies it would be overclaiming. What they give you is the truth about where you stand inside ChatGPT, which is the thing you cannot fix while you are guessing.

Want to see your own competitor share of voice and start closing the gaps in the same place? Start a DeepSmith free trial and pull real numbers before you decide.