Full disclosure: we compete in this category
Prefometry sells an AI visibility workflow, so weigh that bias and verify everything on both vendors' own pages before buying.
What our sampling observed
Across 30 days of repeated buyer questions to five engines, peec.ai was cited 49 times, concentrated on its homepage, pricing page, and its AI visibility product page — product-led citations, but from two engines. otterly.ai drew 58 citations across four engines on its homepage, pricing, and features pages.
The interesting split: Otterly's answers reached more engines, while Peec's citations went deeper into product pages where it does buy. For buyers, that maps to reach versus depth — Otterly is the broader known quantity across engines; Peec is quoted where its product is the direct answer.
Side by side
Dimensions reflect public positioning observed in our sampling and each vendor's published pages; confirm current plans on their sites.
| Dimension | Peec AI | Otterly.AI |
|---|---|---|
| Posture | Self-serve AI visibility with competitive citation analysis | Self-serve prompt-level AI visibility tracking |
| Engine reach in our sampling | Cited by 2 of 5 engines | Cited by 4 of 5 engines |
| Citation style observed | Product and pricing pages | Homepage, pricing, and features pages |
| Typical buyer | Teams focused on competitive citation analysis | Broad prompt tracking across many engines |
| Best fit | Depth on citation competition per prompt | Fast, wide coverage at entry pricing |
Which one should you pick
If your priority is understanding which competitors keep winning your citations and how, Peec's competitive-analysis emphasis fits. If you want the widest engine coverage per dollar with the simplest start, Otterly has the broader sampling footprint in our observations.
If what you need is turning observed gaps into owned, rechecked work — with the raw answer and citation evidence preserved — that is the loop Prefometry runs.