--- title: "Kordy vs Profound vs Peec AI vs Otterly vs Scrunch: 5 AI visibility tools compared (2026)" description: "Five AI visibility trackers compared in 2026. Best for technical products: Kordy ($495/mo, the only one of the five tracking coding agents). Cheapest start: Otterly ($25/mo). Enterprise marketing teams: Profound. Many brands on daily tracking: Peec AI. Enterprise compliance: Scrunch ($250/mo)." url: https://kordy.io/compare/ --- compare # Kordy vs Profound vs Peec AI vs Otterly vs Scrunch: 5 AI visibility tools compared (2026) Kordy is an AI visibility tracker for companies that sell technical products: developer tools, infrastructure, security, DevOps, data and AI tooling. It measures what coding agents (Claude Code, Codex, Antigravity, Cursor) and chat assistants recommend when a builder asks which tool to use, and hands the vendor a fix list. Profound, Peec AI, Otterly and Scrunch are AI search analytics tools for marketing teams. They track ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini and similar chat assistants. None of them track coding-agent recommendations. Their coding-agent tie-in is an MCP server that lets you query their own dashboard data from inside Cursor or Claude. So the choice is about your buyer. If your customers ask a marketing-facing chat assistant, all four rivals cover more chat surfaces than Kordy does on their larger plans. If the people who choose your product build with coding agents, or ask one when they evaluate a technical product, Kordy is the only one of the five that reports what that agent said. - **Best for technical products:** Kordy, $495 per month, the only tool of the five that tracks what coding agents recommend. - **Cheapest way to start:** Otterly, $25 per month billed annually ($29 month to month), 7-day trial without a credit card. - **Enterprise marketing teams:** Profound, up to 9 answer engines refreshed daily, used by a third of the Fortune 100 by its own count. - **Many brands on daily tracking:** Peec AI, daily tracking on every plan and up to 13 models on Enterprise, built for marketing teams and agencies. - **Enterprise compliance:** Scrunch AI, SOC 2 Type II compliant, plans from $250 per month. By [Ziv Kaspersky](https://kordy.io/about/), founder of Kordy, 23 September 2026 | Tool | Surfaces monitored | Tracks coding-agent recommendations | Starting price | Refresh | Built for | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Kordy | Four coding agents (Claude Code, Codex, Antigravity, Cursor; Starter and Growth pick 3) plus five chat models; npm, docs and MCP registries | Yes. Every prompt is replayed inside the agent, and fetched pages are logged where the agent exposes them | $495 per month (Starter). Free 60-prompt report first | Weekly | Vendors of developer tools, infrastructure, security, DevOps, data and AI tooling, and the agencies that serve them | | Profound | Up to 9 answer engines on Enterprise: ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Mode, Gemini, Microsoft Copilot, DeepSeek, Claude, Google AI Overviews, Exa Search. The trial covers ChatGPT, Gemini and AI Overviews | No. MCP server connects ChatGPT, Claude Desktop, Cursor and Cline to Profound's data | Not published. 7-day free trial (50 prompts run daily), then Enterprise by sales | Daily | Enterprise marketing, AEO, content and PR teams; agencies | | Peec AI | Starter, Pro and Advanced: choose 3 of ChatGPT, AI Mode, AI Overviews, Microsoft Copilot, Gemini and Naver AI (Perplexity as an add-on). Enterprise: up to 13 models, adding Claude, Grok, DeepSeek, Perplexity and others | No. MCP and API expose Peec's data to Claude, Cursor and n8n | $95 per month (Starter, monthly billing). Pro $245, Advanced $495, Enterprise by sales | Daily (daily or weekly on Enterprise) | Marketing teams and agencies | | Otterly | ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, Perplexity, Microsoft Copilot; Claude, Gemini and AI Mode as paid add-ons | No. MCP (Standard plan and above) connects Claude, ChatGPT and Cursor to Otterly's data | $25 per month (Lite, billed annually; $29 monthly). 7-day trial, no credit card | Daily | Marketers, from solo to enterprise | | Scrunch AI | Core: ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews, Microsoft Copilot. Enterprise: 9 LLMs, adding Claude, Gemini, Meta AI, Google AI Mode and Grok | No. MCP (Enterprise on the pricing page) connects Claude, ChatGPT, Microsoft Copilot Studio, Cursor, VS Code and Windsurf to Scrunch's data; Agent Traffic reports AI bot visits to your site | $250 per month (Core). 7-day trial | Not stated on public pages | Mid-market and enterprise brands; agencies | ## Why coding agents are a separate surface They give different answers. In our July 2026 study of more than 500 sessions across 11 product categories, Claude Code and the Claude.ai chat app named a different number one pick on 48% of the buying questions we put to both. How much depends on the agent: Codex differed from ChatGPT on 21% of questions and Antigravity from Gemini on 11%. The three coding agents did not all name the same top pick on 31%. In mature categories everyone mostly agrees. The gaps open in emerging ones. They also draw on different sources. Across our sessions through September 2026, 59% of the sites the chat assistants cited never showed up in any coding agent's sources on the same question. Reddit, among the most-cited sources on chat engines such as Perplexity, never showed up in Claude Code's sources and was never cited by Codex. Antigravity used it in 17% of its sessions. What gets a product picked by a coding agent is its own question. In our data, project maturity was the strongest signal correlated with being recommended by Claude Code, and presence in MCP registries was the strongest one a vendor can act on (both statistically significant). That is why a chat-assistant dashboard cannot stand in for coding-agent measurement. You have to measure each agent on its own, and again when the model changes. [Read the full research](https://kordy.io/blog/coding-agents-vs-chat-assistants/). **48%**Buying questions where Claude Code and the Claude.ai chat app named a different number one pick. **59%**Sites cited by chat assistants that never showed up in a coding agent's sources on the same question. **50%**Emerging-category questions where Claude Code's number one pick changed when it moved to a new model version. The mature control: 13%. ## Tool by tool Each card states what the other tool does well, in its own words where possible, and when we would tell you to pick it over Kordy. ### Kordy vs Profound Profound describes itself as "The AI Platform to Power Your Marketing". It tracks up to 9 answer engines on Enterprise, refreshes daily, and says its AI Marketer "identifies the work worth doing, drafts it, and pings you for approval". It says a third of the Fortune 100 trust it. Its MCP server lets marketers connect ChatGPT, Claude Desktop, Cursor and Cline to their Profound data. That is data access from inside a coding tool, not a measurement of what the coding tool recommends. **Pick Profound** if you are an enterprise marketing team and chat-assistant coverage with an AI marketer that drafts the work matters more than coding-agent surfaces. **Pick Kordy** if the people who choose your product work with coding agents and you want to know what Claude Code, Codex, Antigravity and Cursor say about your category. Source: [tryprofound.com](https://www.tryprofound.com/) (quotes), [pricing](https://www.tryprofound.com/pricing) and [MCP announcement](https://www.tryprofound.com/blog/bring-profound-data-directly-into-your-ai-workflow-with-mcp). ### Kordy vs Peec AI Peec AI is "AI Search Analytics for Marketing Teams". It tracks visibility, position, sentiment and share of voice daily. Starter, Pro and Advanced let you choose 3 models from ChatGPT, AI Mode, AI Overviews, Microsoft Copilot, Gemini and Naver AI; Enterprise tracks up to 13, including Claude, Grok, DeepSeek and Perplexity. Peec reports 3,000 or more brands and agencies as customers. Peec exposes its data to Claude, Cursor and n8n through MCP and an API. It does not state that it tracks coding-agent output. **Pick Peec AI** if you run many brands and want daily chat-assistant tracking with a strong agency workflow. **Pick Kordy** if you sell a technical product and weekly, per-agent measurement with a fix list is the point. Source: [peec.ai](https://peec.ai/) (quote) and [pricing](https://peec.ai/pricing). ### Kordy vs Otterly Otterly monitors ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, Perplexity and Microsoft Copilot on its base plans, with Claude, Gemini and AI Mode as add-ons. Prompts are monitored daily, the Lite plan starts at $25 per month billed annually ($29 month to month), and there is a 7-day trial without a credit card. Otterly is the cheapest way on this page to start watching chat assistants. Its MCP server, included from the Standard plan up, connects Claude, ChatGPT and Cursor to Otterly's data. **Pick Otterly** if you want the lowest entry price for chat-assistant monitoring and on-page GEO recommendations. **Pick Kordy** if the buyer you lose is asking a coding agent, where Otterly has no data. Source: [otterly.ai pricing](https://otterly.ai/pricing), [help centre trial page](https://help.otterly.ai/free-trial) and [MCP page](https://otterly.ai/mcp). ### Kordy vs Scrunch AI Scrunch AI helps brands monitor their presence in AI search, optimize their site, and deliver content directly to AI agents. The Core plan, $250 per month with a 7-day trial, tracks ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews and Microsoft Copilot. Enterprise tracks 9 LLMs, adding Claude, Gemini, Meta AI, Google AI Mode and Grok. The company reports SOC 2 Type II compliance. Scrunch's Agent Traffic feature shows which AI bots visit your site and which content they request. That is useful, but it is not the same as knowing what a coding agent recommended. **Pick Scrunch** if you want chat coverage plus AI bot-traffic analysis and enterprise compliance. **Pick Kordy** if you need the coding-agent surface, and check both if you sell to technical teams and to a marketing buyer. Source: [scrunch.com](https://scrunch.com/), [pricing](https://scrunch.com/pricing) and [developer MCP docs](https://developers.scrunch.com/mcp/overview). ## Where Kordy is the weaker choice Kordy is built around coding agents, both in what it measures and in the fixes it recommends and builds for you. That focus is also its limit. If coding agents play no part in how your buyers choose, one of the other four tools is the better fit. ## Questions people ask before choosing ### Can I use Kordy alongside Profound or Scrunch? Yes, and many vendors of technical products should. Use the chat-assistant tool for your marketing buyer and Kordy for the buyers who work with coding agents. The two surfaces answer differently and reward different fixes. ### Does an MCP integration mean the tool tracks Cursor? No. An MCP server lets you ask Cursor or Claude to pull numbers out of the vendor's dashboard. Tracking Cursor, which is what Kordy does, means running your buyers' prompts inside Cursor and recording which vendor it named and which page it cited. Only the second one tells you what your prospect saw. ### What does Kordy actually run each week? Your category's buying prompts, up to 100 on Starter, replayed across the coding agents on your plan (Starter and Growth pick 3 of Claude Code, Codex, Antigravity and Cursor) and five chat models against up to eight competitors. Each answer is scored for mention, first pick and recommendation, and cited sources are logged where the agent exposes them, so the fix list points at a real page. free play ## See who the agents name in your category 60 prompts across five models and four coding agents. Report in your inbox within 24 hours. [Get your visibility report](https://kordy.io/request/)