// Compare
Vizelo vs Profound: comparing AI visibility platforms
Profound and Vizelo are in the same category — answer-engine visibility platforms built for the era after the blue-link SERP. Comparable feature surface, different bets on where the work lives. Here is the honest breakdown.
Last reviewed 2026-05-26 from public docs + product testing.
// TL;DR
When to pick which.
- Pick Profound if your procurement gate requires SOC 2 Type II on the contract today, if you want a vendor with publicly visible US enterprise references, or if your work centers on brand-sentiment monitoring inside AI answers.
- Pick Vizelo if you want six-engine coverage as a first-class concern, an integrated schema + llms.txt + JSON-LD production workflow, lower entry pricing, or a real free-forever tier to test the category before committing.
- Pick both for a bake-off if you’re deciding between the two. Run a 30-day side-by-side on the same prompt set and let the data settle the argument.
// Matrix
Feature-by-feature.
| Capability | Vizelo | Profound |
|---|---|---|
| Answer-engine coverage | ||
| ChatGPT | ✓ | ✓ |
| Perplexity | ✓ | ✓ |
| Google AI Overviews | ✓ hourly | ✓ |
| Bing Copilot | ✓ first-class | Partial |
| Claude.ai | ✓ first-class | Partial |
| Google Gemini | ✓ first-class | Partial |
| Citation intelligence | ||
| Per-prompt citation graph | ✓ | ✓ |
| Competitor citation steal-list | ✓ ranked | ✓ |
| Brand sentiment in AI answers | ✓ | ✓ Focus area |
| Source-domain attribution | ✓ | ✓ |
| Production workflow | ||
| Schema + JSON-LD one-click ship | ✓ integrated | Partial · recommendations only |
| llms.txt + AI sitemap generation | ✓ | — |
| Content briefs from AI demand signals | ✓ | Add-on |
| Entity-completeness audit | ✓ | Partial |
| Workflow + integration | ||
| Public REST API | ✓ | ✓ Enterprise |
| Webhooks | ✓ | Partial |
| Slack alerts (per-prompt) | ✓ | Project-level |
| SSO + SCIM | ✓ Scale plan | Enterprise |
| Trust + access | ||
| SOC 2 Type II | In progress | ✓ |
| Public US enterprise references | Few · early | ✓ |
| Never trains on customer data | ✓ contractual | ✓ |
| Free-forever tier | ✓ 25 prompts | — |
| Starting paid price | $49/mo | Sales-led, enterprise-priced |
// Profound strengths
Where Profound wins.
Three real strengths worth naming. First, SOC 2 Type II certification, which we do not have today and Profound does. For regulated industries and enterprise procurement teams that gate on that letter, Profound clears the bar this quarter and we do not. Second, US enterprise references — their customer logo wall includes recognizable consumer and B2B brands you can point to in an internal proposal, which makes the “is this a real product” conversation a lot shorter. Third, brand-sentiment monitoring is a central design pillar for them; they have been thinking carefully about how to summarize what AI engines say about a brand, not just whether they mention it, and that work shows in the UI. If your CMO’s primary worry is reputation inside AI answers, Profound’s sentiment work is mature.
// Vizelo strengths
Where Vizelo wins.
Three real strengths in the other direction. First, engine coverage breadth: Vizelo treats Bing Copilot, Claude, and Gemini as first-class citizens with the same refresh cadence and prompt-level depth as ChatGPT and Perplexity, not as “coming soon” checkmarks. The engines reward different sources for different prompts — the brand that wins ChatGPT often loses Perplexity — and you cannot tell that story on a partial dataset. Second, the production workflow is integrated: from the screen where you see your citation gap, you can generate and ship the schema, the llms.txt fragment, the JSON-LD, and the content brief that closes it. Profound recommends what to fix; we ship it. Third, access economics: a real free-forever tier, $49/mo starting price, and no sales-call gate to try the product. That matters for teams without enterprise procurement budget who still want to do GEO seriously.
A fourth, quieter difference: cadence. Vizelo refreshes the AI Overview surface hourly and the conversational engines at intervals that match the engine’s own update cycle, so when a citation moves you see it the same day. Slower-refresh products tell you about the change at the end of the week, which is fine for trend reporting and wrong for incident response. If your team treats citation share as an operating metric — something you watch in a Slack channel, not a quarterly slide — refresh cadence is the feature that compounds.
// Honesty
What this comparison doesn’t cover.
We’re newer than Profound and we don’t pretend otherwise. They have shipped to more enterprise customers than we have, they cleared SOC 2 Type II before we did, and their team has been talking publicly about answer-engine measurement longer. If your procurement process requires “name three Fortune 500 references,” we’re going to come up short on that question today. We’re also building toward a different center of gravity: Profound leans into being the enterprise sentiment monitor; Vizelo leans into being the working surface where a GEO program actually ships. Neither bet is wrong. Pick the one that matches the work you’re actually doing.
// Pricing
Pricing.
Vizelo publishes prices on the website: free forever for 25 tracked prompts, $49/mo for individual practitioners, and a Scale tier that adds SSO/SCIM and a higher API ceiling. Profound is sales-led; pricing is not publicly listed and is configured per enterprise contract. In our conversations with teams who have evaluated both, Profound’s annual contracts typically land in the $30k–$100k+ range depending on prompt volume and seats. If you want to know what you’ll pay before a call, we list it; if you want a configured enterprise contract with negotiated terms, Profound is built for that conversation. Check their site for the current sales process.
FAQ
Common questions about switching or dual-running.
Can I use both Vizelo and Profound?
Technically yes, but unlike comparing Vizelo with Ahrefs or Semrush, here you’d be paying twice for the same category. Both platforms measure answer-engine visibility. We’d recommend running both for a 30-day evaluation if you’re deciding between them, then standardizing on one.
How long does migration take?
Connecting your domain to Vizelo and running a first scan takes under five minutes. Replicating your tracked-prompt list from Profound takes whatever it takes to export the list — typically thirty minutes to an afternoon for an enterprise prompt set. The change-management piece, retraining the team on Vizelo’s dashboard, is usually a half-day.
Will I lose historical data if I switch?
Historical citation data lives in whichever platform collected it. Profound’s history stays in Profound; Vizelo’s starts the day you connect. If you need a continuous timeline, export your Profound data before churning. We can import a CSV of prior measurements for context, but the underlying source-attribution signal is rebuilt from scratch.
Does Vizelo replace Profound entirely?
For the core job — answer-engine visibility tracking, brand sentiment in AI answers, competitor steal-lists, schema and llms.txt workflow — yes. Where Profound wins today is SOC 2 Type II certification, which is still in progress on our side. If your procurement team requires SOC 2 on day one, Profound is the safer pick this quarter.
What if my team is already trained on Profound?
The mental model transfers cleanly: prompt sets, citation share, sentiment trends, competitor comparisons. Vizelo’s UX adds a tighter production workflow on top — schema and llms.txt ship from the same screen where you see the citation gap. Most teams are productive in Vizelo within a half-day.
// More