Profound ↗
Enterprise answer-engine intelligence and reporting are preferred.
← All toolsAnother direction / 01 Another direction / 02 Another direction / 03 Another direction / 04
The selection guideSource-backed research ↗
AI Search Monitoring / AI-search intelligence and GEO monitoring platform
Obsero
AI search intelligence, visibility tracking, and GEO recommendations
AI-search visibility monitoringCitation and sentiment analysisGEO consulting
Why it stands out
Explains prompt, market, and model-credit billing.
Source review: · Public-source research, not a hands-on test
↗ Best for
Brand, SEO, content, and communications teams measuring AI-search presence.
! Know before you buy
No checked source proves citation precision, score accuracy, repeatability, agent success, causal visibility lift, traffic, conversion, or revenue impact.
01 / Editorial assessment
Is Obsero for you?
The AICiteKit take
Obsero is a credible new GEO shortlist candidate for teams that need configurable AI-search monitoring and prompt-level pricing. Official pages document visibility, sentiment, prompt, agent, citation, and content modules, seven named AI surfaces, and usage-based pricing starting at a displayed £98/month minimum. Evidence is stronger for advertised scope and commercial structure than for efficacy: the public G2 claim and testimonials are vendor-selected, and no independently verified product-rating sample, controlled benchmark, or hands-on test was found in this pass. Test fixed prompts, raw answers, credit arithmetic, model coverage, MCP permissions, retention, and consulting scope before purchase.
A good fit if you are…
- Brand, SEO, content, and communications teams measuring AI-search presence.
- Agencies tracking multiple clients, markets, cities, or competitors.
- Teams investigating citations and source attribution alongside visibility and sentiment.
- Buyers who prefer usage-based pricing to fixed seat or domain tiers.
Consider another option if…
- Buyers requiring independently audited citation precision or visibility scores.
- Teams needing traditional keyword rankings, backlink crawling, or full technical SEO.
- Small teams seeking a free permanent tracker.
- Organizations expecting dashboard metrics to prove causal revenue impact.
02 / Scope, not promises
Features & coverage
- Named AI surfaces
ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, Google AI Mode, Gemini, Perplexity, Claude, and Microsoft Copilot are named on the pricing page.
Archived research · Official pricing page checked 2026-10-24; confirm model versions and regionsResearch excerpt · AI-search visibility and sentiment- Billing unit
One tracked prompt is run once per day in one market and one AI model; Claude counts as four model credits.
Archived research · Official pricing pageResearch excerpt · Pricing and limits- Included features
Daily pulls, unlimited seats, visibility, sentiment, prompt, citation, agent analytics, content optimiser, postcode targeting, and MCP access are listed as included.
Archived research · Official pricing page; confirm technical entitlementsResearch excerpt · Pricing and limits- Evidence boundary
No checked source proves citation precision, score accuracy, repeatability, agent success, causal visibility lift, traffic, conversion, or revenue impact.
Archived research · Editorial assessment dated 2026-10-24Research excerpt · What the evidence does not prove
AI-search visibility and sentiment
Obsero advertises visibility and sentiment tracking across named AI surfaces. Sampling, model versions, localization, personalization, and score methodology remain public verification questions.
Prompt, agent, and citation analytics
The platform says it analyzes exact prompt wording, AI-agent performance, and sources used in answers. No checked independent source validates its scoring or attribution accuracy.
Usage-based pricing and Claude credits
The pricing page defines a daily prompt/market/model unit and charges Claude as four model credits. Confirm calculator output, minimums, overages, and invoice terms for the target setup.
MCP and consulting boundary
MCP access is listed as included and GEO consulting can be added separately, but the checked pages do not expose the endpoint, permissions, or consulting deliverables in full.
A focused evaluation workflow
- Define prompts, entities, competitors, markets, and models.
- Run daily observations across selected AI surfaces.
- Review visibility, sentiment, prompts, agents, citations, and competitors.
- Use recommendations to form a GEO worklist and record changes.
- Re-run the fixed sample and compare raw answers, citations, dates, and credit use.
03 / Commercial boundaries
Pricing & limits
Terms below reflect the 2026-10-24 source review, not a new live quote. Confirm currency, billing term, tax and required scope with the provider.
- Public entry pricing
Tier 1 is £0.013 per tracked prompt per day for 1–250 prompts, with a displayed minimum of £98/month; a calculator example displays £114/month.
Archived research · Official pricing page checked 2026-10-24; confirm invoice calculationResearch excerpt · Pricing and limits- Billing unit
One tracked prompt is run once per day in one market and one AI model; Claude counts as four model credits.
Archived research · Official pricing pageResearch excerpt · Pricing and limits
Your buying checklist
Get these answers first.
- Which model versions, countries, languages, and surfaces are included at the selected volume?
- Can buyers export raw answers, citations, timestamps, and score inputs?
- How are tier rates, minimums, markets, model credits, and Claude charges calculated?
- What are the MCP endpoint, authentication, read/write scope, rate limits, logs, and retention terms?
- Which consulting deliverables, implementation hours, cancellation terms, and attribution definitions apply?
Pricing context & qualifications
Research checked 2026-10-24. Obsero’s official pricing page shows £0.013 per tracked prompt per day for 1–250 prompts, a £98/month displayed minimum, tiered rates through 20,000 prompts, and custom Enterprise pricing above that. A tracked prompt is one prompt once per day in one market and one model; Claude counts as four credits. Confirm calculator output, minimums, overages, retention, exports, MCP terms, and consulting scope.
04 / The tradeoffs
Strengths & weaknesses
Reasons to shortlist
- Explains prompt, market, and model-credit billing.
- Names major AI-search surfaces including Google AI Overviews and AI Mode.
- Combines visibility, sentiment, prompt, citation, agent, and content workflows.
- Lists daily pulls, unlimited seats, and MCP access as included features.
- Offers optional GEO consulting separately from platform access.
Reasons to pause
- No independently verified product-specific review sample, benchmark, or hands-on test found.
- Sampling, model versions, localization, personalization, and score methodology are incomplete publicly.
- Minimum price and calculator example require reconciliation for a real configuration.
- MCP endpoint, permissions, rate limits, and retention were not exposed in the checked packet.
- Visibility and citation observations do not prove traffic, conversion, pipeline, or revenue impact.
No checked source proves citation precision, score accuracy, repeatability, agent success, causal visibility lift, traffic, conversion, or revenue impact.
05 / Choose by the job
Alternatives to consider
Editorial fit comparisons—not performance rankings or claims that one option always wins.
Peec AI ↗
Focused recurring AI-search visibility monitoring is preferred.
Semrush AI Visibility Toolkit ↗
AI visibility is needed within a broader SEO suite.
Brandlight ↗
Brand visibility and source-influence analytics are preferred.
06 / What we can substantiate
Reviews & evidence
No independently verified product-rating sample, controlled benchmark, or hands-on test was found. The homepage displays a vendor-selected G2 score and testimonials, which support only the vendor's presentation of social proof, not a representative customer consensus or efficacy claim.
AICiteKit assessment: public-source research, not a hands-on product test. Official materials establish stated scope; reviews are dated and may concern the broader platform. Neither establishes guaranteed citations, traffic or revenue.
Sources & original verification dates
| Source | Evidence type | Checked |
|---|---|---|
| Obsero homepage ↗ | official | |
| Obsero pricing ↗ | official | |
| Obsero about page ↗ | official identity page | |
| CitedIndex Obsero listing ↗ | directory discovery; not quality evidence |
Original review evidence & date context
Preserved from the published research. Dates, review counts and product-scope qualifications below have not been refreshed by this layout migration.
Evidence checked 2026-10-24. Official pages support product identity, advertised modules, named AI surfaces, and pricing mechanics. The homepage’s G2 score and testimonials are vendor-selected and were not independently verified as a representative rating sample. No checked source proves score accuracy, citation precision, repeatability, agent success, causal visibility lift, traffic, conversion, pipeline, or revenue.
Pilot checks
- Freeze prompts, markets, languages, models, and times.
- Export raw answers, citations, timestamps, and model metadata.
- Recalculate prompt and Claude-credit billing.
- Verify MCP permissions, retention, deletion, and revocation.
- Separate visibility observations from analytics and revenue outcomes.
Research notes & unresolved discrepancies
- Official homepage, pricing, and about pages checked 2026-10-24.
- The public G2 score and testimonials were treated as vendor-selected evidence because the underlying independent sample was not directly verified.
- CitedIndex was used for discovery only.
- No controlled benchmark or hands-on test was found.
Layout migration: October 4, 2026. The original MDX research is retained in the repository; this reorganization does not refresh its factual verification dates.