LLMpulse is an AI search visibility platform that tracks how brands show up in ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, and Google's AI answers. This LLMpulse review looks at what it tracks, what it costs, and who it actually fits. The short version: it is a solid measurement tool for a team that wants to see mentions, citations, and competitor share of voice across five AI models without a big commitment up front. It is a weaker fit if what you actually need is a full content production and publishing system, because LLMpulse measures and drafts, but the public evidence does not show it running an end to end editorial workflow, which is where something like DeepSmith covers both halves. We judged it on five things: whether it tracks signals that matter, how wide its AI engine coverage runs, how its prompt and project limits hold up in practice, whether its recommendations connect to real action, and whether the pricing works for an ordinary marketing team.
What LLMpulse Does
LLMpulse describes itself as an AI search visibility and reputation platform. You set up a project for a brand or website, and the platform tracks it across AI search engines. One account can hold several projects, which is useful if you run an agency or manage more than one brand.
The company says it was built by three co-founders, working as a fully remote team. Esteve Castells has a background in SEO and GEO consulting. Daniel Peris has spent more than 15 years in SEO, ASO, and mobile growth. Adrian Rojas is the engineer who the company says built the platform from the ground up. LLMpulse presents itself as bootstrapped, without outside funding, though that is company-reported background rather than something we could independently verify.
What LLMpulse AI Search Visibility Tracking Covers
The core of the product is tracking whether AI engines mention your brand, cite your pages, and compare well against competitors.
Mentions and visibility. LLMpulse checks whether an AI response names your brand at all. It reports raw mention rates plus an AI Visibility Score that the vendor says weighs where in the answer your brand appears, so an early mention counts differently than a late one.
Citations and sources. A citation, in LLMpulse's terms, is when an AI model links to a specific domain or URL as a source. The platform captures the full response text along with the source URLs the model returned, which is more useful to a content team than a single visibility number, because you can see exactly which pages are winning citations and go look at what those pages do differently.
Share of voice and competitors. You can add competitors and compare visibility across the same tracked prompts and models. There is no universal benchmark for what counts as a good share of voice score here. It depends entirely on which prompts, competitors, and markets you pick, so the number is only as meaningful as the prompt set behind it.
Sentiment. LLMpulse analyzes how AI models describe a brand at the level of each individual response, then rolls that up into a broader read. This is a Growth-tier feature, not included on Starter, and it should be read as an interpretation of AI generated language, not a measure of how real customers feel.
Model and market coverage. Every tracked prompt runs across five models by default: ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Google AI Mode, and Google AI Overviews. You can also compare results across markets and languages, which matters because LLMpulse's own material notes that these systems pull from different indexes and search behavior, so a shift on one platform does not mean your overall AI presence moved the same way everywhere.
Beyond the five included models, Claude, Microsoft Copilot, Grok, DeepSeek, and Alexa for Shopping are paid add ons on every tier, starting at $13 a month per model. Walmart Sparky, Naver AI, Baidu AI, and Brave AI show up only through sales conversations. It is worth being clear about this: LLMpulse does not track every major AI engine out of the box. It tracks five, and you pay more to go beyond that.
LLMpulse Pricing
LLMpulse's public pricing is listed in euros for weekly tracking:
| Plan | Monthly | Annual equivalent | Tracked prompts | Projects | Models included |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Starter | €49 | €40.83 | 50 | 1 | 5 |
| Growth | €99 | €82.50 | 150 | 2 | 5 |
| Scale | €299 | €249.17 | 450 | 5 | 5 |
| Scale+ | €599 | €499.17 | 1,200 | 10 | 5 |
| Scale++ | €1,199 | €999.17 | 2,400 | 15 | 5 |
| Enterprise | Custom | Custom | Custom | Custom | 5 included, more by arrangement |
Annual billing runs at ten times the monthly rate, which works out to roughly two months free compared with paying monthly. Prices exclude VAT and local taxes. A separate daily tracking option exists at a meaningfully higher price. In dollars, the daily plans list at $96 a month for Starter, $181 for Growth, and $545 for Scale, though the full daily price ladder in euros is not published, so you would need to check the live billing page before assuming a number.
Starter gets you visibility, share of voice, mentions and citations, recommendations, GEO Writer, and MCP access, but it leaves out sentiment analysis, owned media tracking, AI traffic analytics, the in-app LLM Pulse Agent, reputation features, GEO testing, and API or Looker Studio access. Growth adds sentiment, owned media, AI traffic analytics, and the LLM Pulse Agent, along with more prompts and a second project. Scale adds API access, the Looker Studio connector, CLI access, custom reports, and higher capacity, which is the tier where multi brand or agency use starts to make practical sense. Add-ons include extra models from $13 a month each, an additional 100 tracked prompts for €122 a month, and an extra project for €61 a month.
Weighed against other AI visibility trackers, LLMpulse pricing lands in the middle of the field once you account for the add-ons most teams end up needing. For value, Starter is a reasonable low-cost way to watch five AI surfaces for one brand with a tight prompt list, but it is a starting point rather than a full program. Growth is probably the practical floor for a marketing team that wants sentiment and traffic data alongside visibility. Scale is a real jump in price, and it only pays for itself if you actually need the API, custom reporting, and higher prompt and project caps that come with it.
Where LLMpulse Shines
The LLMpulse AI search visibility platform gives you five included models at every tier, including Starter, which is a genuine strength. Most buyers do not have to choose between watching ChatGPT and watching Google's AI surfaces just to unlock basic coverage.
Citation-level detail is the other clear strength. Because LLMpulse captures full responses, citation positions, and source URLs rather than only a top-line score, a content team can trace a citation back to the exact page that earned it and study what that page does well.
Competitor benchmarking turns a vague worry about being invisible in AI answers into something you can actually measure: whether a named competitor wins more mentions or citations on the same tracked prompts. Recommendations and GEO Writer then try to connect that measurement to action, generating content briefs, draft articles, and positioning ideas from the same visibility data, which is a sensible logical chain even if the public material does not spell out exactly how good those recommendations are.
Technical access is broad for the price. MCP is available on every plan through OAuth, and Scale unlocks the REST API, a CLI, webhooks, and BI connectors for Looker Studio and Power BI, which gives technical teams room to pull the data into their own systems rather than being stuck in a dashboard.
Where LLMpulse Falls Short
Weekly tracking is the default, and it is not the same as real-time monitoring. Daily tracking exists, but it costs a lot more, and the full price list for it is not published.
A number of features that a marketing lead is likely to want sit above Starter. Sentiment, owned media tracking, AI traffic analytics, and the in-app agent do not show up until Growth, so the €49 entry price is not really the price of the product most teams end up needing.
Broader model coverage costs extra everywhere. Claude, Copilot, Grok, DeepSeek, and shopping-specific tracking are paid add-ons on top of every plan, so a team that wants wide engine coverage should add those fees into the real monthly cost before comparing it to anything else.
GEO Writer generates briefs, articles, content updates, and PR ideas from the visibility data, but the public feature page does not say it publishes directly to a CMS, and it does not document brand voice controls, internal linking automation, a content calendar, or image production. It is reasonable to treat GEO Writer as a content assist layered on top of measurement, not as a full content operations platform.
LLMpulse also markets AI traffic and sales measurement, but the public pages do not fully explain how attribution is calculated. It is fair to say the product tries to connect visibility with traffic and conversions. It is not fair to say it proves which AI answer caused a specific sale, and the vendor's own material does not claim that either.
Independent customer evidence is still thin. G2 lists one verified review at 5.0 stars. Trustpilot shows four reviews and a 4 out of 5 TrustScore, all five-star, though Trustpilot itself does not fact-check the claims inside reviews. Capterra has one review with a perfect score, and that review was vendor-referred rather than fully independent. None of this is disqualifying, but it is too small a sample to support a claim that customers consistently get better results, and a third-party rundown of the product even lists a Scale++ price that no longer matches the current official page, a reminder to check the live pricing page rather than trust the first number you find.
Who Should Use LLMpulse (and Who Should Skip It)
LLMpulse is a good fit if you are an SEO, GEO, or content team building a repeatable process for measuring AI visibility, especially if you want competitor share of voice and citation-level detail without a large starting cost. It also suits agencies or multi-brand teams once the project and prompt limits at Growth or Scale line up with how many brands you actually run, and it fits technical teams that want MCP, API, or webhook access into their own systems.
It is a weaker fit if you need daily, near-real-time tracking and cannot justify the extra cost of the daily plans. It is also a weaker fit if you need Claude, Copilot, Grok, or DeepSeek coverage included in the base price rather than billed as add-ons, or if your real problem is a full content calendar with automated publishing and distribution, since the public evidence does not show LLMpulse doing that end to end. Teams that need fully documented attribution from a specific AI answer to a specific sale should ask LLMpulse directly for that methodology before relying on it, since it is not laid out publicly.
Alternatives to Consider
If LLMpulse does not line up with what you need, these are the options worth weighing against it.
DeepSmith. DeepSmith tracks the same AI search visibility data LLMpulse does, mention rate, citation rate, share of voice, sentiment, and a competitor leaderboard, across ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, and up to ten engines on the top tier. The difference is on the production axis: DeepSmith turns those gaps into finished, publish-ready articles, researched, internally and externally linked, with metadata and a cover image, and publishes them straight to WordPress, Webflow, Strapi, Sanity, or Contentful. Plans run $99, $199, and $399 a month with a 7-day free trial, so it is the closer comparison if measuring and producing are the same project for you.
Peec AI. A focused AI search visibility tracker that gives a clean daily read on where your brand appears and which sources the models lean on, without the setup overhead, though it does not write the content that closes the gaps it finds.
Profound. Positioned at the enterprise end, with deeper analytics across more engines and an agentic layer, which its own material frames as a marketing platform rather than a rank tracker, and priced well above LLMpulse.
Otterly. A lighter, lower-cost monitor aimed at solo marketers and small teams that want daily tracking on a focused prompt list, with cost climbing quickly once you need more engines or a larger prompt set.
Is LLMpulse Worth It?
If the core need is understanding where your brand shows up in AI answers, which pages get cited, and how you compare with named competitors, LLMpulse is worth considering, and the €49 Starter tier is a low-cost way to start. If you also need sentiment, owned media signals, and traffic analytics for regular reporting, Growth at €99 a month is the more realistic starting point, because those are the features most marketing leads end up wanting within the first few months. Scale only earns its higher price if you actually plan to use the API, custom reports, or the higher prompt and project caps that come with it. If your real bottleneck is producing and publishing content at volume rather than measuring where you already stand, LLMpulse should not be evaluated as though it solves that problem, because GEO Writer helps turn visibility data into briefs and drafts, but the public evidence does not show a complete production and publishing workflow behind it.
That last gap is where DeepSmith fits a different need. DeepSmith also tracks AI search visibility, mentions, citations, and share of voice, but it pairs that tracking with a production pipeline that researches, writes, links, and formats a publish-ready article from the same visibility data, and can push it straight to a CMS. If your unmet need is not just knowing which prompts and pages are winning citations, but actually producing the content to close those gaps without a separate tool and a separate handoff, that combination is worth a look. You can try it with a 7-day free trial, no long-term contract required.
