Bear AI vs Authoritas AI Tracker (2026): Which AI visibility tool is right for you?

Key Takeaways

• Bear AI starts at $100/mo for basic ChatGPT tracking (30 prompts, 2 blogs/mo), while Authoritas uses a credit system starting at £90/mo (2,000 credits) with broader LLM coverage from day one
• Authoritas tracks 7 AI engines out of the box (ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini, DeepSeek, Google AI Overviews, Bing AI). Bear AI's basic plan only covers ChatGPT -- you need Enterprise for full platform access
• Bear AI includes built-in content generation (2-unlimited blogs/mo depending on plan). Authoritas is purely a tracking and analytics platform with no content creation features
• Authoritas' credit-based pricing means you pay per query across all LLMs. Bear AI's flat monthly rate includes a fixed number of prompts but limits which AI platforms you can monitor on lower tiers
• For publishers and licensing teams, Authoritas offers IP protection tracking and citation analysis tailored to content monetization. Bear AI is built for marketing and growth teams focused on brand visibility and lead generation
• If you need an all-in-one solution that tracks visibility and generates optimized content, Bear AI delivers more in one package. If you want granular multi-LLM tracking with flexible credit allocation, Authoritas gives you more control

Overview

Bear AI

Bear AI positions itself as "the marketing stack for AI agents" -- a Y Combinator-backed platform built for marketing and growth teams trying to generate revenue from AI search. The pitch is simple: track how AI engines talk about your brand, then use Bear's built-in content generator to create optimized articles that improve your visibility. Customers include Peerspace, Medal, Wispr Flow, and other growth-stage companies.

The platform combines visibility tracking with content production. You're not just monitoring where you show up in ChatGPT or Perplexity -- you're also getting AI-written blog posts designed to fill gaps and improve your rankings. It's a closed-loop system: see the problem, generate the fix, track the results.

Authoritas AI Tracker

Autoritas AI Tracker is the AI search monitoring arm of Authoritas, a UK-based SEO platform that's been around since before "GEO" was a term. The AI Tracker launched as a standalone product in 2024 to help brands, publishers, and e-commerce sites monitor how LLMs cite and recommend them.

Unlike Bear AI's all-in-one approach, Authoritas focuses purely on tracking and analytics. You get detailed visibility into brand mentions, sentiment, citation sources, and share of voice across 7 major AI engines. The credit-based pricing model lets you allocate queries across different LLMs based on where your audience actually searches. Publishers especially like it for tracking content usage and identifying licensing opportunities.

Autoritas also offers a separate traditional SEO platform (Essential £99/mo, Advanced £399/mo, Expert $799/mo), but the AI Tracker is a distinct product with its own pricing.

Side-by-side comparison

Pricing models: flat rate vs credits

The pricing structures are completely different, which makes direct comparison tricky.

Bear AI pricing

Bear AI uses tiered monthly plans:

• Basic ($100/mo): ChatGPT tracking only, 30 prompts, 2 blog posts/mo
• Enterprise (custom pricing): All AI platforms, unlimited prompts, unlimited content generation

That's it. Two tiers. The gap between them is massive -- you either get bare-bones ChatGPT tracking or you jump straight to enterprise pricing for full access. There's no middle ground for teams that want multi-LLM tracking without enterprise budgets.

The content generation is the differentiator here. Even at the Basic tier, you're getting 2 AI-written blog posts per month optimized for AI search visibility. That's value you won't find in pure tracking tools.

Authoritas AI Tracker pricing

Credits are consumed per query. Different AI models cost different amounts:

• Google AI Overviews: 1 credit per query
• ChatGPT (GPT-4o mini): 1 credit
• Perplexity (Sonar): 1 credit
• Claude 3.5 Haiku: 1 credit
• Gemini 1.5 Flash: 1 credit
• Bing AI: 1 credit
• DeepSeek: 1 credit

So if you're on the P1 plan (£90/mo, 2,000 credits), you can run 2,000 queries distributed however you want across the 7 supported LLMs. Want to focus on ChatGPT and Perplexity? Allocate credits there. Need to check Google AI Overviews more frequently? Shift credits accordingly.

The flexibility is real, but you have to think about credit budgeting. Run out mid-month and you're either buying more credits or waiting for the reset.

LLM coverage: breadth vs depth

This is where the two tools diverge sharply.

Bear AI on the Basic plan only tracks ChatGPT. That's a problem if your audience uses Claude, Perplexity, or Google AI Overviews. You're flying blind on 6+ major AI search platforms unless you upgrade to Enterprise. For a tool launched in 2024 when multi-LLM tracking is table stakes, this feels like an artificial limitation to push people toward enterprise contracts.

On the Enterprise tier, Bear AI does track "all major LLMs" -- but the website doesn't specify which ones or how many. The vagueness is frustrating.

Authoritas AI Tracker covers 7 engines from the start:

1. ChatGPT (GPT-4o mini)
2. Perplexity (Sonar)
3. Claude 3.5 Haiku
4. Google Gemini 1.5 Flash
5. DeepSeek
6. Google AI Overviews
7. Bing AI

Even on the free 50-credit tier, you can query all 7. No artificial platform restrictions. The limitation is query volume, not which LLMs you can access.

For brands that need comprehensive visibility across the AI search landscape, Authoritas wins on coverage transparency and accessibility.

Content generation: Bear AI's differentiator

This is the feature that sets Bear AI apart. Authoritas doesn't generate content at all -- it's purely a monitoring tool.

Bear AI includes an AI writing agent that produces blog posts optimized for AI search visibility. On the Basic plan, you get 2 posts per month. On Enterprise, it's unlimited.

The content is grounded in the visibility data Bear collects. The idea is: Bear identifies prompts where you're not showing up, then generates articles designed to fill those gaps. It's the "find gaps, create content, track results" loop that tools like Promptwatch also emphasize.

The quality of Bear's generated content is hard to evaluate without hands-on testing, but the concept is sound. If you're a small marketing team without dedicated writers, having AI-generated drafts that are already optimized for LLM visibility saves time. You still need to edit and fact-check, but the first draft is done.

For teams that already have content production workflows or want to write their own material, this feature is less valuable. You're paying for something you won't use. Authoritas' pure-tracking model might be a better fit.

Tracking and analytics depth

Both tools track the basics: brand mentions, citations, share of voice, trending prompts. The differences are in presentation and granularity.

Bear AI shows:

• Trending prompts across LLMs (with volume indicators like "High-volume")
• How AI agents talk about your brand
• Which prompts drive visibility
• Traffic analysis from AI agents

The dashboard screenshots on Bear's website show a clean, modern interface focused on actionable insights. It feels built for marketers who want quick answers, not analysts who want to dig into raw data.

Authoritas AI Tracker provides:

• Brand mention tracking across 7 LLMs
• Sentiment analysis (positive, negative, neutral)
• Citation source identification (which URLs LLMs are pulling from)
• Share of voice trends over time
• Competitor comparison (see how your visibility stacks up against rivals)
• Publisher-specific features: IP protection tracking, content usage monitoring, licensing opportunity identification

The publisher angle is unique. If you're a media company or content site, Authoritas helps you track when AI engines use your content and identify potential licensing revenue. Bear AI doesn't address this use case at all.

For pure brand visibility tracking, both tools cover the essentials. Authoritas goes deeper on analytics and competitor benchmarking. Bear AI focuses on actionable insights tied to content creation.

User experience and interface

Bear AI's website emphasizes simplicity and speed. The messaging is "built for marketing and growth teams" -- people who need answers fast, not complex dashboards. The screenshots show a streamlined interface with clear visualizations and minimal clutter.

Autoritas comes from an enterprise SEO background, and it shows. The platform is more data-dense, with detailed tables, trend graphs, and filtering options. It's built for people who want to slice data multiple ways and export reports. The learning curve is steeper, but the analytical depth is greater.

If you're a solo marketer or small team, Bear AI's simplicity is an advantage. If you're an agency or larger brand with dedicated SEO/analytics staff, Authoritas' depth is worth the complexity.

Integration with traditional SEO

Autoritas offers a separate, full-featured SEO platform (Essential £99/mo, Advanced £399/mo, Expert $799/mo) that covers keyword tracking, backlink analysis, technical SEO audits, and more. The AI Tracker integrates with this platform, so you can see both traditional search and AI search visibility in one place.

Bear AI is AI-search-only. There's no traditional SEO functionality. If you need both, you'll be using Bear AI alongside another tool like Ahrefs, Semrush, or Moz.

For teams already invested in Authoritas' SEO platform, adding the AI Tracker is a natural extension. For everyone else, it's an extra decision point: do you want one vendor for both, or best-of-breed tools for each?

Publisher vs brand focus

Autoritas explicitly targets three audiences: brands, publishers, and e-commerce. The publisher features (IP protection, licensing insights, content usage tracking) are unique in this space. If you're a media company trying to monetize your content in the age of AI, Authoritas is one of the few tools built for that.

Bear AI is laser-focused on marketing and growth teams at product companies. The customer logos (Peerspace, Medal, Wispr Flow) are all B2C or B2B SaaS companies, not publishers. The content generation feature is designed for brands creating their own content, not publishers protecting existing content.

If you're a publisher, Authoritas is the obvious choice. If you're a brand, either tool works -- it depends on whether you value content generation (Bear AI) or analytical depth (Authoritas).

Pros and cons

Bear AI pros

• All-in-one solution: tracking + content generation in one platform
• Clean, marketer-friendly interface
• Y Combinator backing suggests strong product development velocity
• Flat monthly pricing is predictable (no credit budgeting)
• Content generation saves time for small teams

Bear AI cons

• Basic plan only tracks ChatGPT -- massive limitation
• No pricing transparency for Enterprise tier
• Vague about which LLMs are covered on Enterprise
• No publisher-specific features
• No traditional SEO integration
• Limited analytical depth compared to competitors

Authoritas AI Tracker pros

• Tracks 7 AI engines from day one, even on free tier
• Credit-based pricing offers flexibility in how you allocate queries
• Deep analytics and competitor benchmarking
• Publisher-specific features (IP protection, licensing insights)
• Integrates with Authoritas' full SEO platform
• Free tier available for testing
• Transparent about LLM coverage and credit costs

Authoritas AI Tracker cons

• No content generation -- tracking only
• Credit budgeting adds complexity
• Steeper learning curve than Bear AI
• UK-based pricing (£) may be less convenient for US customers
• Separate SEO platform requires additional spend if you want both

Who should pick which tool

Choose Bear AI if:

• You're a small marketing team (1-5 people) that needs both tracking and content creation
• You want a simple, all-in-one solution without juggling multiple tools
• Your primary focus is ChatGPT visibility (and you're okay with limited LLM coverage on the basic plan)
• You value speed and simplicity over analytical depth
• You have budget for Enterprise pricing to unlock full LLM coverage
• You're a B2C or B2B SaaS company focused on growth and lead generation

Choose Authoritas AI Tracker if:

• You need comprehensive tracking across 7+ AI engines from day one
• You're a publisher or media company concerned with IP protection and licensing
• You want deep analytics, sentiment tracking, and competitor benchmarking
• You already use or plan to use Authoritas' SEO platform
• You prefer flexible, credit-based pricing over flat monthly rates
• You have dedicated SEO/analytics staff who can handle a more complex tool
• You're an agency managing multiple clients and need granular reporting

Consider Promptwatch if:

You want the best of both worlds -- comprehensive tracking across 10 AI engines (more than either Bear AI or Authoritas), plus built-in content generation, plus Answer Gap Analysis that shows exactly which prompts competitors rank for but you don't. Promptwatch is the only platform that closes the full loop: find gaps, generate optimized content, track results, and measure actual traffic from AI search. Starting at $99/mo with crawler logs, Reddit/YouTube tracking, and ChatGPT Shopping monitoring included.

Final verdict

Bear AI and Authoritas AI Tracker are solving different problems for different audiences.

If you're a small team that wants one tool to handle both visibility tracking and content creation, Bear AI delivers. The all-in-one approach is appealing, and the content generation feature is genuinely useful for teams without dedicated writers. But the Basic plan's ChatGPT-only limitation is a dealbreaker for most brands in 2026. You'll likely need Enterprise pricing to get real value, and that's a black box.

Autoritas AI Tracker is the better choice for teams that want comprehensive, multi-LLM tracking with no artificial platform restrictions. The credit-based pricing is more complex but also more flexible. The publisher features are unique and valuable if you're in media. The lack of content generation means you'll need another tool or internal resources for that, but the analytical depth is superior.

For most brands in 2026, I'd lean toward Authoritas for pure tracking needs -- you're getting more LLM coverage and transparency at a similar price point. But if you're a small team that values simplicity and needs content help, Bear AI's all-in-one model is worth the trade-offs, assuming you can afford Enterprise.

The real question is whether you want a tracking-only tool or a tracking + content generation platform. Answer that, and the choice becomes clear.