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

Key Takeaways

• Pricing difference is massive: Otterly.AI starts at $29/mo for 15 prompts, while Authoritas uses a credit system starting at £90/mo (~$113) for 2,000 credits -- but credits burn fast (10-50 per query depending on the model)
• Otterly.AI is monitoring-only: You get brand tracking, citation analysis, and a GEO audit tool, but no content creation or gap analysis features to actually fix what's broken
• Authoritas covers more LLMs: Tracks 7+ models including DeepSeek and offers more granular credit control, while Otterly.AI focuses on 6 core platforms
• Authoritas bundles with traditional SEO: If you need both AI visibility tracking and classic SEO tools (rank tracking, backlinks, technical audits), Authoritas offers a combined platform. Otterly.AI is AI-search-only.
• Neither platform helps you create content: Both show you where you're invisible but leave you to figure out what to write. If you need content gap analysis and AI-powered writing to actually improve visibility, tools like Promptwatch fill that gap.
• Best for small budgets: Otterly.AI. Best for enterprise publishers or brands with complex SEO needs: Authoritas.

Overview

Otterly.AI

Otterly.AI launched as a focused AI search monitoring tool aimed at brands and marketers who want to track how ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews, Gemini, AI Mode, and Copilot mention their brand. The pitch is simple: see where you show up, what gets cited, and how you compare to competitors. They added a GEO audit feature that scans your pages for 25+ on-page factors that affect AI citations. Pricing is straightforward -- monthly plans based on prompt volume. The interface is clean and the onboarding is fast. It's a monitoring dashboard, not an optimization platform.

Authoritas AI Tracker

Authoritas started as a traditional SEO platform and added AI search tracking as the landscape shifted. Their AI Tracker monitors brand mentions, sentiment, and citations across ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini, DeepSeek, Google AI Overviews, and Bing AI. The credit-based pricing model gives you flexibility to allocate queries across different LLMs based on what matters most. Authoritas positions itself as a combined platform -- you can track both traditional search rankings and AI visibility in one place. The AI Tracker is sold separately from their core SEO product, but enterprise customers often bundle them. It's built for publishers, large brands, and agencies that need detailed reporting and multi-channel visibility.

Side-by-Side Comparison

Pricing Comparison

The pricing models are fundamentally different. Otterly.AI sells you a fixed number of prompts per month -- straightforward, predictable. Authoritas uses credits that vary by LLM: Google AIO costs 10 credits per query, GPT-4o mini costs 20, Claude 3.5 Haiku costs 30, Gemini Flash costs 40, and models with search enabled (Sonar, GPT-4o with search) cost 50 credits each. This means a 2,000-credit plan could give you 200 Google AIO queries or 40 Sonar queries. You need to estimate your usage carefully.

For small teams tracking a handful of prompts, Otterly.AI's $29 entry point is hard to beat. For enterprises running hundreds of queries across multiple models, Authoritas offers more control but at a significantly higher baseline cost.

User Interface and Ease of Use

Otterly.AI wins on simplicity. The dashboard is clean, the setup takes minutes, and you can start tracking prompts immediately. You add your brand, input the prompts you care about, and Otterly.AI runs them across the six supported platforms. Results are organized by platform, with clear visualizations showing mention frequency, citation sources, and share of voice vs competitors. The GEO audit tool scans your pages and gives you a checklist of what to fix. It's not fancy, but it works.

Authoritas has more depth but also more complexity. The interface reflects its roots as an enterprise SEO platform -- lots of tabs, filters, and configuration options. You can drill into sentiment analysis, compare performance across different LLMs, and export detailed reports. The credit system adds a layer of planning: you need to decide which models to prioritize and how to allocate your budget. For a solo marketer, this feels like overkill. For a team managing multiple brands or a publisher tracking content usage across platforms, the granularity is useful.

Verdict: Otterly.AI for speed and ease. Authoritas for control and depth.

LLM Coverage and Data Quality

Otterly.AI tracks six platforms: ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews, Google AI Mode, Gemini, and Microsoft Copilot. This covers the major consumer-facing AI search experiences. The data is reliable -- I've spot-checked results against manual queries and they match. Otterly.AI doesn't support Claude or DeepSeek, which is a gap if you're tracking enterprise or developer-focused audiences.

Authoritas covers seven or more LLMs, including Claude, DeepSeek, and Bing AI alongside the core platforms. The credit-based model lets you prioritize: if your audience is heavy on ChatGPT, you can allocate more credits there. If you're a publisher tracking how Claude cites your articles, you can focus on that. The sentiment analysis is more detailed than Otterly.AI's -- it breaks down positive, neutral, and negative mentions with context.

Both platforms refresh data regularly, but neither offers real-time monitoring. You're looking at snapshots, not live feeds.

Verdict: Authoritas for breadth and flexibility. Otterly.AI for the core platforms most brands care about.

GEO Audit and Optimization Features

Otterly.AI includes a GEO audit tool that scans your pages for 25+ factors that influence AI citations: structured data, content depth, readability, internal linking, external authority signals, and more. You get a score and a list of recommendations. It's helpful for identifying low-hanging fruit, but it doesn't tell you what content to create or which prompts you're missing. You're still guessing at what topics or angles would improve your visibility.

Authoritas doesn't have a GEO audit feature. It shows you which prompts mention your brand and which don't, but it doesn't analyze your pages or suggest fixes. The assumption is that you'll use their traditional SEO tools (sold separately) for on-page optimization.

Neither platform offers content gap analysis or AI-powered content generation. They're both monitoring dashboards. If you want to close the loop -- find the gaps, create content that ranks in AI, and track the results -- you need a third tool. Promptwatch handles that workflow: Answer Gap Analysis shows exactly which prompts competitors rank for but you don't, then the AI writing agent generates articles grounded in citation data and prompt volumes.

Verdict: Otterly.AI has a basic audit tool. Authoritas has nothing. Both leave you to figure out content strategy on your own.

Brand Monitoring and Competitor Analysis

Both platforms let you track your brand mentions and compare them to competitors. You input competitor names, and the tools show you share of voice across prompts and platforms.

Otterly.AI's competitor tracking is straightforward: you see a percentage breakdown of which brands get mentioned most often for each prompt. The visualizations are clear. You can filter by platform to see where you're winning and where you're losing. The weakness is that you don't get much context -- you see that a competitor is mentioned more, but not why or what content they have that you don't.

Authoritas offers more granular competitor analysis, especially for publishers. You can see which of your articles are being cited vs competitors' articles, track sentiment differences, and identify which LLMs favor which sources. The reporting is more detailed, which is useful for stakeholder presentations but can feel like information overload for day-to-day optimization.

Verdict: Tie. Otterly.AI for simplicity, Authoritas for depth.

Publisher-Specific Features

Authoritas is explicitly built for publishers. They offer licensing insights -- tracking how often your content is cited by AI platforms, which can inform licensing negotiations. They also provide IP tracking to help you understand how your content is being used (or misused) across LLMs. If you're a news organization, magazine, or content platform trying to monetize AI citations, these features matter.

Otterly.AI has no publisher-specific features. It's designed for brands and marketers tracking mentions, not content creators tracking usage.

Verdict: Authoritas by a mile if you're a publisher. Otterly.AI isn't even playing this game.

Traditional SEO Integration

Authoritas sells a separate SEO platform (Essential £99/mo, Advanced £399/mo, Expert $799/mo) that includes rank tracking, backlink analysis, technical audits, keyword research, and reporting. If you're already using Authoritas for SEO, adding the AI Tracker makes sense -- you get a unified view of traditional search and AI search in one platform. For enterprises, this is a selling point.

Otterly.AI is AI-search-only. If you need traditional SEO tools, you're using something else (Ahrefs, Semrush, etc.) alongside Otterly.AI.

Verdict: Authoritas if you want one platform for everything. Otterly.AI if you're fine with a best-of-breed stack.

Reporting and Exporting

Otterly.AI offers basic reporting: you can export data as CSV or PDF, and the dashboards are clean enough to screenshot for stakeholder updates. It's functional but not fancy.

Authoritas has enterprise-grade reporting: custom dashboards, scheduled reports, white-label options for agencies, and API access (enterprise tier only). If you're presenting to a board or managing multiple clients, Authoritas gives you the tools to build polished reports.

Verdict: Authoritas for agencies and enterprises. Otterly.AI for internal teams that don't need heavy reporting.

What's Missing from Both

Neither Otterly.AI nor Authoritas helps you create content that ranks in AI search. They show you the problem -- you're not visible for X prompts, competitors are getting cited more -- but they don't help you solve it. You're left to manually figure out what content to write, which topics to cover, and how to structure it for AI citations.

This is the gap that platforms like Promptwatch fill. Promptwatch's Answer Gap Analysis shows exactly which prompts competitors rank for but you don't, then the AI writing agent generates articles, listicles, and comparisons grounded in 880M+ citations analyzed. You're not guessing -- you're creating content engineered to get cited by ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity, and other models. Then you track the results with page-level visibility scoring and traffic attribution.

Both Otterly.AI and Authoritas also lack AI crawler logs -- you can't see when ChatGPT, Claude, or Perplexity bots hit your site, which pages they read, or errors they encounter. This makes it harder to diagnose indexing issues.

Pros and Cons

Otterly.AI

Pros:

• Affordable entry point ($29/mo)
• Simple, fast setup
• GEO audit tool for on-page optimization
• Clean interface, easy to understand
• Covers the six most important AI platforms

Cons:

• Monitoring-only -- no content creation or gap analysis
• Limited LLM coverage (no Claude, DeepSeek)
• Basic reporting and export options
• No publisher-specific features
• No API access

Authoritas AI Tracker

Pros:

• Broader LLM coverage (7+ models)
• Flexible credit system for allocating queries
• Publisher-focused features (licensing insights, IP tracking)
• Detailed sentiment analysis
• Integrates with Authoritas SEO platform
• Enterprise-grade reporting and white-label options

Cons:

• Expensive baseline (£90/mo minimum)
• Credit system is confusing -- costs vary wildly by model
• No GEO audit or on-page optimization features
• Complex interface with a learning curve
• Monitoring-only -- no content creation or gap analysis
• API access locked to enterprise tier

Who Should Pick Which Tool

Pick Otterly.AI if:

• You're a small business, startup, or solo marketer with a tight budget
• You want to track brand mentions across the core AI platforms without complexity
• You need a GEO audit tool to identify on-page issues
• You're fine with a monitoring-only tool and plan to handle content creation separately
• You don't need traditional SEO tools bundled in

Pick Authoritas AI Tracker if:

• You're a publisher tracking content usage and exploring licensing opportunities
• You're an enterprise or large brand with budget for detailed reporting
• You need to monitor Claude, DeepSeek, or other niche LLMs
• You want flexibility to allocate query budgets across different models
• You're already using (or considering) Authoritas for traditional SEO
• You need white-label reporting for clients or stakeholders

Pick neither (or supplement with something else) if:

• You need content gap analysis to identify what you're missing
• You want AI-powered content generation to actually improve your visibility
• You need AI crawler logs to diagnose indexing issues
• You want page-level tracking and traffic attribution to connect visibility to revenue

For those use cases, Promptwatch is the only platform that closes the loop: find gaps, generate content, track results.

Final Verdict

Otterly.AI and Authoritas AI Tracker are both solid monitoring tools, but they serve different audiences. Otterly.AI is the budget-friendly option for small teams that want to track the basics without complexity. Authoritas is the enterprise choice for publishers and large brands that need detailed reporting, broader LLM coverage, and integration with traditional SEO.

The real limitation is that both are monitoring-only. They tell you where you're invisible but don't help you fix it. If you're serious about improving your AI search visibility -- not just tracking it -- you need a platform that includes content gap analysis, AI-powered writing, and optimization tools. That's a different category of tool entirely.

One-liner summary: Otterly.AI is cheaper and simpler; Authoritas is more powerful and expensive. Both show you the problem but leave you to solve it yourself.