Teams comparing Noma, Profound and Peec AI are usually asking one thing: which of these will show us, every day, whether AI answers name our brand, and give us something useful to do about it? All three describe daily tracking, so the real differences sit in the details: engines, integrations, pricing model and what happens after the data arrives.
Where a company’s public pages do not give a detail, this comparison says so rather than guessing.
A note on who wrote this: this comparison is written by Noma, which makes one of the three tools. Every detail about Profound and Peec AI comes from that company’s own public FAQ, pricing or help pages as we checked them in September 2026. Products in this category change quickly, so confirm current details with each vendor before you buy.
How do Noma, Profound and Peec AI compare at a glance?
All three run prompts daily. They differ most in how openly they list engines and prices, in their integrations, and in what they offer beyond tracking.
| Area | Noma | Profound | Peec AI |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine coverage | ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity and Claude; Grok as a paid add-on on self-serve plans | Not stated on its public pages | Every tracked model; which models: not stated on its public pages |
| Data collection and refresh | Each prompt once a day per engine, fresh session, no personalization; re-run on demand; full answers stored | Daily structured prompts, starting from industry recommendations | Each prompt once every 24 hours on every tracked model |
| Metrics | Visibility, share of voice, position, sentiment (0 to 100), cited sources | Appearance, citations, sentiment, ranking, competitive presence | Brand visibility and source visibility; filters by model, country and tags |
| Sources and citations | Cited sources with Earned and Owned views; gap analysis on Growth and above | Citations analyzed; further detail not stated on its public pages | Domains and URLs with citation frequency |
| Integrations | Google Search Console, MCP server for Claude, CSV export, API on Scale and above | Not stated on its public pages | Looker Studio connector, REST API, MCP server |
| Pricing model | Published plans from $79 a month ($65 annual rate) to $1,199 ($999); custom Enterprise; billed in USD | Lite and Enterprise plans; Agents priced in credits | By tracked prompts and models; 15% yearly discount; no extra cost for countries or languages |
| Free trial | 3 days, 25 prompts, all five engines (a card is taken) | Not stated on its public pages | Not stated on its public pages |
| Security (SOC 2, SSO) | No SOC 2 report, no SSO | Not stated on its public pages | Not stated on its public pages |
| Agencies | Studio and Agency plans with client workspaces and white-label reports | Not stated on its public pages | Sub-brand tracking; agency bundles with central billing |
Engine coverage is the least transparent area
Noma lists its engines publicly. Peec AI runs prompts on every model you track, and Profound’s public pages do not detail which platforms it covers.
Noma tracks ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity and Claude on self-serve plans. Grok is an add-on at $49 a month for access, then credits per answer, and is included on the free trial and Enterprise. Noma does not track Google AI Overviews, Google AI Mode, Microsoft Copilot, Meta AI or ChatGPT Shopping. If those surfaces matter to your buyers, that is a real limitation.
Peec AI lets you filter results by AI model, but which models are available is not stated on its public pages. Profound describes prompts running across AI platforms without naming them. For both, ask for the current engine list before you buy.
How does each tool collect and refresh data?
All three describe a daily cycle. The differences are in how prompts are chosen and how much control you have over reruns.
- Noma: asks every tracked prompt on each engine once a day from a fresh session with no personalization. You can re-run any prompt on demand, and the full answer is stored so you can read exactly what the engine said.
- Profound: runs daily structured prompts. Your set starts from industry recommendations, and you can edit, disable or add prompts. Setup is described as immediate.
- Peec AI: runs each prompt once every 24 hours on every tracked model, and you can organize prompts with tags.
Whichever tool you use, the prompt set decides how meaningful the numbers are. Our guide to which prompts to track covers how to build one.
What do the metrics and citation views show?
Each tool measures whether you appear, how you are described and who else appears. They name and slice those measures differently.
Metrics
Noma reports visibility (the share of answers naming you), share of voice, position in the answer, sentiment on a 0 to 100 scale scored only on answers that name the brand, and cited sources. Profound analyzes appearance, citations, sentiment, ranking and competitive presence, with opt-in anonymized benchmarking. Peec AI separates brand visibility (direct mentions) from source visibility (content that informs answers), filterable by model, country and prompt tag.
Sources and citations
Peec AI tracks domains and URLs along with citation frequency. Noma shows cited sources with Earned and Owned views, so you can tell third-party coverage from your own pages, and on Growth and above adds gap analysis: the prompts where competitors are named and you are not. Profound lists citations among the things it analyzes.
Noma adds tools for acting on what the data shows
Beyond tracking, Noma includes features meant to help you close the gaps it finds. This is where it differs most from the other two, based on their public pages.
Noma has an Actions page, content drafts built from gaps (10 a month on Starter, unlimited on Growth and above; your team edits and publishes them, and nothing is published automatically), a 12-point site audit, and Agent Analytics from server logs showing which AI crawlers read which pages and which pages are crawled but never cited. Profound offers Profound Agents, priced in credits. Peec AI’s public pages focus on measurement and getting data into other tools.
What integrations do they offer?
Peec AI lists the most reporting integrations of the three. Noma covers Search Console, MCP and an API, and Profound’s integrations are not stated on its public pages.
Peec AI offers a Looker Studio connector, a REST API and an MCP server, which suits teams that report from BI tools. Noma integrates with Google Search Console, has an MCP server for Claude, supports CSV export, and offers an API on Scale, Studio, Agency and Enterprise.
The three tools use different pricing models
Noma publishes fixed monthly plans. Peec AI prices by prompts and models, and Profound uses named plans with credits for its agents.
- Noma: Starter $79 a month ($65 on the annual rate) for 1 project and 50 prompts; Growth $299 ($249) for 3 projects with 60 prompts each; Scale $799 ($665) for 10 projects with 100 prompts each; Studio $499 ($415) for 10 client workspaces; Agency $1,199 ($999) for 25 client workspaces; Enterprise custom. The annual rate gives 2 months free, is still billed monthly, and can be cancelled any time. See the pricing page for current prices.
- Profound: plans named Lite and Enterprise, with Enterprise suggested for teams of three or more that need more prompts, agents and dedicated support. Profound Agents use credits: Starter 100 a month, Growth 400 a month, and higher enterprise tiers. Plan prices are not stated on its public pages.
- Peec AI: priced on tracked prompts and models, with per-prompt discounts on higher tiers, no extra cost for multiple countries or languages, and a 15% yearly discount.
What about security and compliance?
None of the three gives a clear yes on the public pages used here. Noma has no SSO and no SOC 2 report, and neither detail is stated for Profound or Peec AI.
If your procurement team requires SOC 2 or single sign-on, raise it early with Profound and Peec AI. If you need either from Noma today, Noma is not the right fit.
Which is better for agencies?
Noma and Peec AI both describe agency setups. Profound’s agency options are not stated on its public pages.
Noma’s Studio and Agency plans give each client workspace 50 prompts, with white-label reports, client-facing dashboards and API access; Agency adds priority support. Noma also runs a managed service where strategists operate the platform for you. Peec AI offers sub-brand tracking and agency bundles with central billing, and its no-extra-cost approach to countries and languages can help agencies with international clients.
Who each tool suits
Based only on what each company publishes:
- Noma: teams focused on ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Claude and Grok that want published prices plus gap analysis, content drafts, a site audit and crawler analytics in one place. It also suits agencies wanting white-label reports. Look elsewhere if you need Google AI Overviews, Copilot, SOC 2 or SSO.
- Profound: teams that want to start from recommended prompts, expect to use AI agents, and see themselves on an enterprise plan with dedicated support.
- Peec AI: teams tracking many countries or languages, reporting from Looker Studio or their own systems, or needing sub-brand tracking with central billing.
How to choose between Noma, Profound and Peec AI
- Confirm engine coverage with each vendor and rule out any that miss the engines your buyers use.
- Check security requirements early. SOC 2 and SSO are not stated for Profound or Peec AI, and Noma has neither.
- Decide what you need most: data access in your own tools (Peec AI), recommended prompts and agents (Profound), or features for acting on gaps (Noma).
- Price each tool at your real prompt count and number of projects or clients.
- Run the same buyer prompts through each and compare the results with what you see when you ask the engines directly.
You can see Noma’s view of your brand with a free brand audit, no account needed. If AEO is new to your team, start with what AEO is or browse the FAQ.