Otterly vs Peec, plus Crawlytics: 2026 pricing, what each tool actually measures, and which AI visibility tool fits a solo, agency, or ecommerce budget.
If you are price-shopping AI visibility tools, here is the short version. Otterly.ai and Peec AI do the same core job from different ends of the market: they sample what LLMs say about your brand. Crawlytics does a different job entirely, reading your server logs to prove which AI crawlers reached your pages, then helping you convert them. Picking between Otterly and Peec is mostly a budget-and-team question. Picking between either of them and Crawlytics is a "which question am I trying to answer" question. This post sorts out both.
Buy Otterly.ai if you are a solo owner or small team who wants to watch brand mentions across ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Google AI answers without spending much. Buy Peec AI if you run an agency or marketing team that needs multi-seat prompt tracking and competitor benchmarking, and the higher European pricing fits your budget. Buy Crawlytics if you want hard evidence that AI agents crawl your site, plus the technical readiness stack (llms.txt, real-crawl attribution, a WebMCP commerce snippet) to turn those visits into outcomes.
Here is how the three line up at a glance. Read the prose under the table for the part that actually decides your purchase, because the columns alone hide the most important distinction.
| Tool | What it measures | Entry price (2026) | llms.txt | Real crawl tracking | Commerce / WebMCP | Best for |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Otterly.ai | Prompt sampling — brand mentions in AI answers | ~$29/mo (Lite) | No | No | No | Solo owners watching brand mentions |
| Peec AI | Prompt sampling — team brand & competitor tracking | ~€89/mo | No | No | No | Agencies and marketing teams |
| Crawlytics | Server-log crawl evidence + readiness stack | $29.99/mo | Yes | Yes | Yes (WebMCP) | Owners who want proof and a fix path |
Prices move. Treat the numbers above as a starting point and confirm current tiers on each vendor's pricing page before you put in a card. Otterly and Peec in particular adjust prompt caps and seat counts often, and Peec's euro pricing shifts with exchange rates if you bill in dollars.
This is the distinction that should drive your decision, so it is worth slowing down on.
Prompt-sampling tools work like a tireless mystery shopper. Otterly and Peec run a list of prompts ("best CRM for small teams," "alternatives to HubSpot," "is Acme any good") against several LLMs on a schedule, then record whether your brand showed up, where it ranked, the surrounding sentiment, and which sources the model cited. Run that across hundreds of prompts over weeks and you get a picture of how AI assistants talk about you. That is genuinely useful, and server logs cannot tell you any of it. Your logs know an agent fetched a page; they do not know whether ChatGPT recommended you or trashed you in an answer a user saw.
Crawlytics works from the opposite side. It reads your server-side traffic and identifies the AI crawlers and agents that actually requested your pages: GPTBot, ChatGPT-User, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot, and the rest. No simulation, no synthetic prompts. If ChatGPT-User fetched your pricing page at 2:14pm, that event is in your logs and Crawlytics surfaces it. This answers a question prompt-samplers structurally cannot: are agents reaching me at all, and which pages? The tradeoff cuts the other way too. Crawl evidence cannot tell you what the resulting AI answer said about you.
Said plainly: prompt sampling measures the output (what the model says), crawl tracking measures the input (what the model fetched). Neither is "the real one." A share-of-voice percentage from a sampler feels precise, but the denominator is a prompt list someone chose, not a measured universe. We dug into why those synthetic numbers are shakier than they look in our breakdown of AI share of voice.
Otterly.ai is the budget-friendly entry into AI brand monitoring. As of 2026 its starting tier sits near $29/mo, often branded Lite, and it focuses on AI search and brand-mention tracking across the major answer engines. For a solo founder or a small content team, that price-to-signal ratio is the main draw. You point it at your brand and a handful of prompts, and within a couple of weeks you can see whether ChatGPT and Perplexity surface you for the queries you care about.
The strengths are real. Otterly is approachable, the dashboards read without training, and the entry price clears the bar for someone testing whether AI search even matters for their niche. It tracks sentiment and citations, so you learn how you are framed and who else gets named alongside you.
The limits show up at that entry price. The cheap tier caps how many prompts you can track and how many LLMs it samples, so a brand with a wide query surface burns through the allowance fast. And like every sampler, Otterly tells you nothing about your server-side reality. It will not tell you that GPTBot has been blocked by your robots.txt for six months, the kind of own-goal that quietly tanks your mention rate. Verify the current prompt and LLM limits on Otterly's pricing page, since those caps are exactly what the entry tier is built to constrain.
Peec AI is the team-oriented option, built in Europe and priced for marketing departments and agencies rather than solo owners. Entry pricing lands around €89/mo as of 2026, which converts to noticeably more than Otterly's floor once you add seats. For that money you get prompt and brand tracking aimed at collaboration: multiple users, competitor benchmarking, and reporting designed to be shared across a team or shown to a client.
Where Peec earns its price is the multi-brand, multi-seat workflow. An agency tracking ten clients across a shared dashboard gets more from Peec's structure than from stacking ten cheap single-brand accounts. European teams also tend to prefer Peec for data-residency and billing reasons, which is a legitimate factor if your procurement cares where the servers sit.
The limits are the mirror of Otterly's. You are paying agency-tier pricing for what is still, at its core, prompt sampling. Peec does not read your server logs, does not generate an llms.txt file, and does not offer a commerce or WebMCP layer. So a Peec subscription tells a polished story about your AI brand mentions while staying blind to whether agents can technically reach and transact on your site. For a solo owner the price alone rules it out; €89/mo is real money to spend before you have proven AI search moves your numbers. Check Peec's current pricing and seat structure directly, because team tools reprice and repackage often.
Crawlytics wins on evidence and on the fix path, and I want to be straight about where it does not.
It wins by working from data you own. Because it reads real server-side crawl activity, Crawlytics answers questions a sampler can only guess at: which AI bots hit you, how often, which pages, and whether that trend is climbing or flat. At $29.99/mo on the Visibility tier it sits right at Otterly's entry price while measuring something the samplers cannot see. It also generates an llms.txt file that hands agents a clean map of your site, attributes AI-referred traffic, and on the $49.99/mo Commerce tier ships a WebMCP snippet so tool-calling agents can query your products directly. That is a stack, not just a chart. Detect the agents, serve them a map, then give them a way to transact.
Where it does not win: Crawlytics is weaker than a dedicated sampler at telling you what AI answers say about your brand across a large prompt set. If your core question is "across 300 buyer prompts, how often does ChatGPT recommend me versus my three competitors, and with what sentiment," Otterly and Peec are built for exactly that and Crawlytics is not. It can prove an agent fetched your comparison page; it cannot tell you the model then ranked you second behind a rival. Crawl logs also need real traffic to be interesting. A brand-new site with no AI crawler visits yet will see a sparse dashboard, where a sampler would still generate findings from day one by querying models directly.
The fair summary: Crawlytics is the strongest pick when you want hard proof and a technical path to act on it, and the wrong pick if multi-prompt brand-mention sampling is the only thing you need. For a same-shape comparison against the high-end sampler in this category, see our deeper Crawlytics vs Profound comparison.
The right answer depends less on the feature grid than on who you are.
Solo site owner. Start with Crawlytics at $29.99/mo or Otterly's ~$29 Lite tier, not both. Pick Crawlytics if your priority is fixing your site so agents can reach and use it, since you also get llms.txt and attribution in the same subscription. Pick Otterly if your priority is simply watching whether AI assistants mention you, and you are not ready to touch your site's plumbing yet. Skip Peec at this stage; the agency pricing does not fit a single-brand budget.
Agency tracking many brands. Peec AI is the natural home for multi-seat, multi-client prompt monitoring, and the per-client reporting is what you are paying for. But pair it with Crawlytics on the client sites where the goal is conversion, not just visibility reporting. Samplers tell the client a story; crawl data plus llms.txt gives you something to actually ship and bill for. The two together cover "what the AI says" and "whether the AI can reach and transact," which is a stronger retainer than either alone.
Ecommerce or commerce-focused. Lead with Crawlytics, specifically the $49.99/mo Commerce tier. AI shopping agents are starting to complete purchases, and a sampler that confirms ChatGPT mentions your store does nothing if the agent cannot parse your prices or drive your checkout. Crawlytics tells you which agents reach your product pages and gives you the WebMCP layer to make those pages buyable. Add Otterly later if you also want to track how AI answers rank your products against competitors.
Whichever way you lean, the cheapest way to decide is to look at real data first. Price-shoppers comparing these tools should run the free grader, then check the Crawlytics pricing page against Otterly's and Peec's current tiers before committing to any annual plan.
Blog post — Best AI Brand Monitoring Tools for 2026 — The full monitoring category compared: Profound, Otterly, Peec, AthenaHQ, Scrunch, Knowatoa, Ahrefs, Semrush.
Blog post — Crawlytics vs Profound: AI Brand Visibility Tools Compared — The same head-to-head against the high-end share-of-voice sampler, with where each tool wins by job.
Blog post — AI Share of Voice Is a Made-Up Number. Here's What to Measure Instead. — Why the share-of-voice percentages prompt-samplers report rest on a denominator nobody can audit.
Blog post — How to Track AI Citations (ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity) — The two-method playbook: server logs for which bots fetched you, prompt-testing for which answers cite you.
Blog post — Crawlytics vs Cloudflare Markdown for Agents: Honest Comparison — When a free Cloudflare feature is enough and when the paid crawl-and-commerce stack earns its price.
Written by Crawlytics Team. Crawlytics tracks AI bots, generates llms.txt, and powers WebMCP commerce, all from one snippet on any stack. See how it works →
Yes, if your main goal is watching AI brand mentions on a tight budget. Otterly's entry tier near $29/mo as of 2026 is one of the cheaper ways to see whether ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Google AI answers surface your brand for the prompts you care about. The catch is the prompt and LLM caps on that tier, which a brand with many target queries outgrows quickly. And it will not tell you anything about your server-side reality, like whether AI crawlers are even reaching your pages. For a small site that also wants that crawl evidence and an llms.txt file, Crawlytics covers more ground at a similar $29.99/mo. Confirm Otterly's current limits on its pricing page before buying.
Peec AI starts around €89/mo as of 2026, with pricing built for teams rather than solo owners. That floor reflects its multi-seat, multi-brand design: competitor benchmarking, collaborative dashboards, and client-ready reporting. Converted to dollars and scaled across seats, it lands well above Otterly's entry tier and above Crawlytics' $29.99/mo. For an agency tracking many clients, that structure can pay for itself; for a single brand, it usually does not. Peec reprices and repackages periodically, so check its current pricing page directly rather than trusting a number from any comparison post, including this one.
Only Crawlytics, of the three. Otterly.ai and Peec AI are prompt-sampling tools: they query LLMs on a schedule and record whether your brand appears in the answers. Neither reads your server logs, so neither can tell you that GPTBot, ChatGPT-User, ClaudeBot, or PerplexityBot fetched a specific page at a specific time. Crawlytics is built on exactly that server-side crawl evidence, which is why it can also flag problems a sampler misses, like an AI bot blocked in your robots.txt. If proving real agent visits matters to you, that is the dividing line between the tools.
Partly, and it depends on the data type. Prompt-sampling history (your tracked prompts, mention trends, sentiment) generally lives inside the vendor and does not export cleanly between Otterly, Peec, and competitors, so switching samplers usually means restarting that timeline. Crawl-based data is different: it originates in your own server logs, so the underlying record is yours regardless of which tool reads it. Moving to or from Crawlytics does not strand your crawl history the way switching samplers strands your mention history. Before you switch anything, export whatever reports your current tool allows so you keep a baseline.
Crawlytics, especially the $49.99/mo Commerce tier, for most Shopify stores. A prompt-sampler can confirm AI assistants mention your store, but that does nothing if shopping agents cannot parse your prices or complete your checkout. Crawlytics shows which AI agents actually reach your product pages and ships a WebMCP commerce snippet that exposes your products as tools an agent can call. That maps directly to revenue in a way mention-tracking does not. Otterly is a reasonable add-on later if you also want to watch how AI answers rank your products against competitors, but lead with the crawl-and-commerce stack.
This page is part of Crawlytics.app. View all pages: llms.txt · llms-full.txt