Reachroller vs Peec AI

Peec AI is the growth story of the category's middle tier, and the numbers behind it are real. The Berlin-founded company raised $29 million and reported crossing $4 million in annual recurring revenue within ten months, a ramp very few marketing SaaS products manage. More than 2,000 teams use it, and its 4.9 out of 5 rating on G2 is the strongest social proof of any AI visibility tool. When a measurement product grows that fast on word of mouth, the measurement is usually good.

It is. Peec's core craft is clean data: custom prompts tracked daily, competitor benchmarking that shows exactly whose brand each engine names, source analysis showing which domains drive the answers in your category, and exports built for teams that want visibility data inside their own reporting stack. Plans include unlimited seats, which agencies appreciate. The interoperability work stands out most: Peec's MCP server and API connect its data into Claude, Cursor, n8n and similar tools, so an operations-minded team can query visibility numbers from inside its own automation without opening another dashboard.

For a mid-market marketing team that already employs writers and wants a rigorous instrument rather than a workflow, Peec is a credible instrument. Nothing in this comparison disputes that. The question is what the instrument costs and what happens after it reports.

It is also worth crediting the pace. Peec shipped its MCP integration while much of the category was still polishing dashboards, and its agency tiers with unlimited client seats arrived early enough to win real agency adoption. A company converting mid-market teams at a $4 million ARR pace inside its first year is executing, and buyers comparing tools should treat that execution as a signal the product will keep improving. The comparison that follows is about fit and price, and it starts from respect for what Peec has built.

Start with the engine menu. Every Peec tier below Enterprise includes three engines chosen from a list of seven that spans ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, Google AI Mode, Copilot, Perplexity, Gemini and Grok. Tracking a fourth engine is a separate paid add-on, reported at around $35 per month on the entry tier and rising on higher plans. The menu is honest, and it means the advertised price covers a narrower slice of the AI landscape than the seven-engine list suggests. Budget for the engines your buyers actually use before comparing totals.

Then the price itself. Entry is 89 euros per month, roughly $95, for 25 prompts. That is more than three times Reachroller's $29 for the same 25 questions, and the gap widens at the agency tiers, which run from $245 to $795 per month. For a mid-market team the difference is noise. For a founder deciding whether AI visibility deserves budget at all, paying triple for the diagnostic layer is a hard sell when the execution layer still costs extra.

And execution is the structural gap. Peec is an analytics product through and through, excellent at describing which AI answers skip your brand and silent on closing them. Every lost question in a Peec report becomes hours of unassisted writing: an answer-shaped page, schema markup, indexing, then a manual recheck. Teams with spare writing capacity absorb that. Teams without it watch the dashboard document losses month after month, which is the most common failure mode in this category and the reason measurement-only subscriptions get cancelled.

Peec's reporting rigor is deservedly praised, so the methodology comparison has to be precise. AI answers are probabilistic. SparkToro measured under a 1 percent chance that two identical ChatGPT runs return the same list of brands, which means a visibility score is only as good as the rules behind it and the evidence underneath it. Two questions expose those rules in any tool: what exactly counts as a mention, and can you read the raw answer behind every number.

Reachroller's answers are on a public methodology page. A mention counts only when your brand name literally appears in the stored answer text, with every answer kept and linked from the score it produced, so any number can be audited down to the sentence an engine wrote. Questions containing your own brand name are excluded from the headline score, because an answer to a question about you mentions you by construction. Rates come from repeated runs rather than single checks. You can disagree with these rules, and you can read them before paying.

The credit meter keeps the same honesty at the billing layer. One credit buys one stored AI answer and ten buy a generated fix page, so the invoice maps directly onto observable events rather than onto seats or vague usage bands. When the meter and the methodology use the same unit, the stored answer, you can reconcile what you paid with what you learned.

Peec gives you strong prompt-level data, and its exports and API mean the raw material is more accessible than in most rivals, which is genuine transparency of a kind. What it does not offer is a published, public scoring methodology you can evaluate as a document before you buy. For a data-fluent team that will rebuild its own metrics from exports, that hardly matters. For a self-serve buyer who will read the headline score and act on it, published rules and stored evidence are the difference between a metric and a mood.

A year of Peec at entry costs about $1,140 at current exchange rates, for 25 prompts on three engines. Add one engine beyond the included three and the reported add-on pricing brings the year to roughly $1,560. The Pro tier at 199 euros runs about $2,570 per year, and the agency tiers run from roughly $2,940 to $9,540. Every one of those figures buys measurement. The writing that acts on the measurement is a separate cost in staff hours or freelance rates, multiplied by every gap the reports find.

Reachroller Starter costs $348 for the same 12 months, covering 400 credits and 25 tracked questions per month, where one credit is one stored AI answer and a generated fix page costs ten credits. That budget funds continuous tracking plus roughly forty citation-ready fix pages a year, each with URL slug, title tag, meta description, schema markup and indexing steps, each followed by a recheck showing whether the answer flipped. Growth at $1,188 per year adds API access and 75 questions, still comfortably under Peec's entry year. Agency at $2,988 per year covers 200 questions, ten workspaces and white-label reports, near the price of Peec's mid agency tier.

The honest caveat is coverage timing. Peec's Perplexity, Gemini and Google-surface tracking is available on its menu today, while Reachroller tracks ChatGPT live today through the official API, with Claude, Gemini, Perplexity and Grok adapters built and rolling out. If a specific engine on Peec's menu is mission-critical this month, weigh that. Over a 12-month horizon, one subscription measures and the other measures, writes and rechecks, at a third of the price.

Agencies should run the math separately, because the multiplier changes it. Peec's agency plans price by project count: $245 per month covers three projects and $495 covers ten, so a ten-client roster costs about $5,940 per year before any engine add-ons. Reachroller Agency covers ten workspaces, 200 questions, white-label reports and the fix generator for $2,988 per year, roughly half, and each client deliverable includes published pages rather than dashboards alone. When the client asks what the retainer produced this quarter, a folder of citation-ready pages is an easier answer than a chart.

The cheapest way to settle this comparison is to run it yourself, and both products make that possible. Start by writing 20 to 25 unbranded buying questions for your category, phrased the way a real buyer would ask an assistant. Leave your brand name out of every one of them, because a question that contains your name produces a mention by construction and measures nothing. This set becomes the input for both trials, and building it is useful work regardless of which tool you keep.

Load the same questions into Peec's entry-tier trial and Reachroller's three-day, 50-credit trial, which requires no card and unlocks every feature. After a week, compare four things side by side. Whether you can open the raw answer behind each score, which Reachroller treats as the core of the product and Peec serves through exports. Whether the tool reports rates over repeated runs, since single checks mislead on probabilistic engines. What the monthly price becomes at your real question count with the engines you actually need, including Peec's add-on pricing past three engines. And what each tool hands you when a question is lost.

That last comparison is the decisive one. Peec hands you a precise description of the gap and the sources driving it, which is genuinely useful input for a writer. Reachroller hands you the same diagnosis plus a generated, citation-ready page with slug, title tag, meta description, schema markup and indexing steps, then rechecks the answer after you publish. One output is a brief. The other is the deliverable, and at a third of the entry price the deliverable wins for any team that does its own writing.

If you are a mid-market marketing team or an agency with writers on staff, a data-fluent operation that pipes metrics into its own stack, and budget where 89 to 795 euros per month is a rounding error, Peec works, and here is what you give up by choosing it. You give up the execution loop: every lost answer Peec finds becomes a writing task your team schedules, drafts, publishes and re-tests by hand. You give up engine headroom on a budget, since the fourth engine and beyond are paid add-ons. And you give up published scoring rules, trading a public methodology for exports you interrogate yourself.

Consider the trajectory as well as the snapshot. Peec's $29 million raise points the company upmarket, toward the agency and enterprise tiers where venture growth expectations get satisfied, so the entry tier is unlikely to get cheaper or more generous over time. Visibility data compounds in value as history accumulates, which means the tool you start with is the tool you will probably still be paying in a year. Choose the one whose year-two price you can already see yourself sustaining.

For self-serve buyers the recommendation is Reachroller, on three concrete grounds. Price: $29 per month against roughly $95 for the same 25 questions, with unlimited competitors tracked on every plan. Honesty: a public methodology page, a literal-mention scoring rule, and every AI answer stored and auditable, so the score is evidence rather than a vibe. And the loop: tracking that flows into a built-in fix generator, ten credits per citation-ready page, followed by a recheck that tells you whether the answer changed. Run the three-day, 50-credit trial without a card and judge the loop on your own brand.