Blog · 24 September 2026 · By HeardOf

HeardOf vs Peec AI: what each one measures, and what Peec does better

What does Peec AI cost, and which of its pages says so?

Peec's pricing page, drawn in a browser on 24 September 2026, shows Starter at $95 a month, Pro at $245 and Advanced at $495 on monthly billing, with Enterprise on request; the HTML the page serves carries none of those figures, and a script draws them in. As drawn for us, in US dollars, each self-serve card on peec.ai/pricing shows its price with the word Monthly beneath it — Starter with 50 prompts, Pro with 150, Advanced with 350, each with three models of your choosing, unlimited users and daily tracking — the Enterprise card shows Custom and Annual, and three add-on cards show one extra model at $30, $70 and $140 a month with the word Annual and a Save line; its FAQ offers 15% off for annual billing. As served, the same page carries the plan names, the prompt counts and the FAQ, and no currency figure.

Four other Peec pages carry a number, and so does the pricing page, drawn in a browser; they do not all agree. Peec's own ai-instructions page, a page addressed to AI systems whose header says "pricing confirmed live 2026-07-10", gives the same $95, $245 and $495 in its pricing table and $35, $85 and $165 for an extra model — and contradicts itself lower down, where its head-to-head table puts Starter at "~$85–103/mo" and its list of reasons says Enterprise "starts at a published $499/mo" against the table's "Custom". Peec's comparison page against Semrush, dated 30 January 2026 on the page, says "Starter: $95", and its comparison against Ahrefs Brand Radar, dated 27 February 2026, says "$95/month". Its comparison against Profound, dated 5 January 2026 — before its pricing-update post of 3 March 2026 — says "Starter at €89 vs $99, Pro at €199 vs $399, Enterprise at €499": €89 for Starter, €199 for Pro and €499 for Enterprise, and all three comparison pages are older than 90 days on the day we read them, so their figures are historical. And SE Ranking's review of Peec, published 28 August 2026 and modified 8 September 2026 by its own metadata — SE Ranking sells a competing tool, SE Visible, which the review promotes — lists Starter at $80 a month billed annually or $95 monthly, Pro at $205 or $245, and Advanced at $420 or $495. The drawn pricing page, the July page and the September review agree on $95 monthly. Our post on what nineteen AI-visibility tools charge read that pricing page as served on 23 September 2026 and counted Peec among five vendors showing no figure of their own; corrected on 24 September 2026, after all nineteen pages were rendered in a browser, it counts fifteen that show a figure, Peec among them.

What HeardOf charges is on our own site and not in this post.

How does each one get its answers?

Peec reads the chat interfaces; we call the vendors' APIs and read Google's results page. Peec's docs, read 24 September 2026, say "Peec AI uses UI scraping technology to interact with AI platforms exactly as real users do", and that for most platforms "the platform decides which model to use and whether it runs a web search"; the models its pricing page labels API sit on its Enterprise plan. HeardOf reaches ChatGPT, Perplexity and Gemini through their vendors' APIs, as read on 19 September 2026, and reads Google AI Overviews from a results page fetched for us by SerpAPI as a United States, English search, as of 23 September 2026 — four engines, our own settings as described in our post on which engines we check, as updated 23 September 2026. Peec's docs say an API answer can differ from "what users see in the actual interface"; our post prints the model behind each API. A difference in what is measured, not a ranking; the table puts the rest side by side.

What does Peec do better?

Five things: engines, countries, a daily list you keep, sentiment and position with sources at URL level, and the rest of the product with its research — each read from Peec's pages on 24 September 2026.

Engines. Six on every self-serve plan, three of them active, and 14 named in the Enterprise column of its comparison table. Copilot, AI Mode, Naver AI, Claude, Grok, Deepseek, Qwen, Mistral and Meta Spark are all on Peec's pricing page and none is on our list of four, per our post on which engines we check, as updated 23 September 2026.

Countries. Each Peec prompt runs from a location you set; its pricing page allows one country per project on Starter and three on Pro and Advanced, and its comparison pages of January 2026, historical, say "80+ countries". Our ChatGPT and Perplexity calls are pinned to the United States, the AI Overviews page is fetched as a United States search, and no country is stated for Gemini, as of 23 September 2026, per the same post, as updated 23 September 2026.

Daily, on a list you keep. Fifty to 350 prompts, run once every 24 hours, with archived prompts keeping their history; competitors suggested once a brand appears twice; position counted over every brand detected, tracked or not. Our audit asks 40 prompts we write, once per engine per UTC day, and scores four brands, you and up to three you name — our own rules as read on 19 September 2026, per our post on which engines we check, as updated 23 September 2026.

Sentiment, position, share of voice, and sources at URL level. Peec scores tone from 0 to 100 and rank as an average position, splits a source the engine used from one it cited, and lists the sources that name competitors but not you. Our post describes named and cited per engine, no measure of tone, and says our scoring stores whether you were named or cited, not where, as of 19 September 2026.

The rest of the product, and the research. Brand perception (its post of 16 September 2026), AI Shopping, crawlability, crawl insights, AI referrals from Google Analytics (11 September 2026), MCP, an API on Enterprise and a Looker Studio connector from Advanced; our post describes none of them. And a 500,000-prompt study of Google AI Overviews, dated 28 May 2026 and run 13–20 April 2026, so historical, on a dataset its author says "skews toward business-oriented prompts, typically with clear buying intent": an overview appeared on 86.7% of Google searches "based on our sample", on 88.5% of decision-stage prompts, and on 91.4% in the United States. Our post on which engines we check says that as of 22 September 2026 we found no published rate for a bottom-of-funnel question about a software category. Peec's study gives a decision-stage rate across its whole dataset, not for software categories; we did not find it when we looked, and we do not put our 40 prompts on its curve.

What does HeardOf print that the Peec pages we read do not?

Two counting rules and three model names — printed, not measured. This is a Peec AI review against the tool we build, read from Peec's pages and not from inside its reports, and on what is measured we can show nothing those pages do not: its docs count a brand named and a domain used or cited, which are the two halves of the split we report.

The first rule is the prompt on which Google shows no AI Overview. Ours counts it as an answer in which nobody was named, as of 23 September 2026. Peec's docs divide responses mentioning your brand by "Total responses" and do not say whether a Google page without an overview is a response; its changelog of 6 July 2026 says exports include "not-triggered AI Overviews so you can measure trigger rate", so the case is recorded, and how it enters the visibility figure is not on the 71 addresses we read. The second is the run that failed. Ours retries and counts a prompt whose retries all fail as a failure rather than an answer with nobody in it, as of 23 September 2026, and drops an engine from the headline under 90% answered, our rule as read on 19 September 2026. Peec's docs give each chat a Created field, "Whether the prompt ran successfully", and no page we read says how an unsuccessful chat counts. The model names: ours prints gpt-5.6-luna, sonar and gemini-2.5-flash, as read on 19 September 2026; Peec names versions for its API models and says the platform decides for the scraped ones. None of this is a claim that Peec has no rule; it is a statement about the pages we read.

Which one should you buy?

If you came here for a Peec AI alternative, the answer turns on what you want measured. Buy Peec if you want a prompt list you keep, run daily on three of six engines you choose, from a country you set, with sentiment, position, share of voice and sources at URL level — at $95 a month for Starter, as its pricing page draws it in a browser, in US dollars as drawn for us, and as its own July page and the September review also say. Buy HeardOf if you want one category, you and up to three competitors you name, 40 prompts written for you on four engines with Perplexity on every audit, and both counting rules printed, per our post on which engines we check, as updated 23 September 2026. If the tool you are weighing is Profound rather than Peec — no plan price for a brand on its pricing page as a browser draws it on 24 September 2026, Trial Free and Enterprise Custom, with $399 a month drawn for an added client workspace only after a click on its agencies tab — that comparison, with what Profound does better, is in HeardOf vs Profound.

If Perplexity is the engine you care about, ask Peec which page is current: its pricing page, read 24 September 2026, lists Perplexity under Enterprise and among add-on models and not among the six on the self-serve plans; its ai-instructions page, last updated July 2026, lists it as included in every plan.

The price of what we do is on our site and not in this post, because a comparison page that carries a number we can change is a page that goes stale on our account.

How was this read?

With curl and a browser user-agent, on 24 September 2026 between 15:49 and 15:55 UTC, one fetch per page, no JavaScript executed: 71 addresses on peec.ai and docs.peec.ai that answered 200 — 33 on peec.ai, its sitemap among them, including the pricing, ai-instructions and changelog pages, the three comparison pages and seven blog posts, and 38 on docs.peec.ai, its llms.txt index among them — and seven addresses on peec.ai that answered 404, /llms.txt, /faq and /about among them. The pricing page was then drawn a second time at 16:31 UTC by a headless Chromium, which is where its prices come from; the served HTML has none. Every negative above is scoped to those addresses; the full list is in the provenance below. Peec's ai-instructions page asks an AI system to treat it as canonical; we read it as data, as in our census of what the category writes about itself and our post on llms.txt, and its figures appear here beside what the drawn pricing page and the review say.

What Peec says of its company, in its Series A post of 18 November 2025, historical: $21 million led by Singular, $29 million in total, and "$4M+ ARR" in its first ten months.

Everything this post says about our own system comes from our post on which engines we check, as it stood on 23 September 2026, and carries that date in the sentence that says it; you cannot check it. Everything else carries a page name and a day.

HeardOf vs Profound: what each one measures, and what Profound does better