/ HOW WE COMPARE
Honest about where we win — and don't.
Different tools do different jobs. Monitors (Semrush, Profound) tell you whether AI already cites you. Auto-fixers (EZY) bulk-generate files. We do the deep, cited readiness audit + the copy-paste fixes — and the one thing none of them offer: a public certification.
We're not going to pretend we do everything — that's the kind of all-green table you should distrust. Here's the real layout, with receipts.
Every rule sources Google / Schema.org / bot docs; magnitudes marked EVIDENCE or HEURISTIC.
10 sectors benchmarked, 9 with n≥5 peers. Your score includes percentile vs sector.
Snapshot regression suite catches weight drift before any rule change ships.
ChatGPT, Claude with web_search, Perplexity Sonar, Gemini, and Grok — locked-query before/after.
| FEATURE | AI Search Ready | EZY | Semrush | Profound |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Entry price[1] | From £5, one-off | $29 / mo | $129+ / mo | $399 / mo · $2k+ real |
| One-off option (no subscription) | ||||
| Free check, no signup | ||||
| 137 cited readiness signals + sector-aware schema[2] | classic SEO | |||
| Copy-paste fix for every issue | ||||
| Downloadable PDF at every paid tier[3] | ||||
| Citation probe — real queries vs ChatGPT/Claude/Perplexity/Gemini/Grok[4] | ||||
| Ongoing AI-visibility monitoring over time | ||||
| Auto-deploy fixes to your CMS | ||||
| Cited, sourced scoring — no black box[5] | ||||
| No free-trial trap · honest pricing | ||||
| Public certification + embeddable badge |
/ RECEIPTS
- [1]Pricing as published on each competitor's pricing page, June 2026. We list our entry tier (£5 one-off); they list theirs (lowest monthly). Tiers above ours scale up to £79/mo (Studio). Profound's caveat: the $399/mo Growth tier covers 3 engines + 100 prompts + 3 seats; reaching Claude, Gemini, Grok, Copilot, Meta AI, DeepSeek and their full Prompt Volumes dataset requires Enterprise ($2,000+/mo + setup fee). Their $99/mo Starter is ChatGPT-only and effectively a demo. Realistic per-customer spend is the four-figure number, which is why we show both.
- [2]Signal count is derived from ALL_RULES.length in our scanner registry — bumped automatically when rules are added. Each rule carries sources[] citing Google Search Central, Schema.org, or canonical bot docs, and an impactRationale labelled either EVIDENCE: or HEURISTIC: for honesty.
- [3]£5 single report, £29 Deep Audit, and £79/mo Studio all include a server-rendered PDF (one-click download from the report header). Semrush + Profound export reports inside their dashboards; we counted those as ‘partial’ because they're bundled into the higher tiers, not the cheapest one.
- [4]Our citation probe runs real queries against OpenAI ChatGPT, Anthropic Claude with web_search, Perplexity Sonar, Google Gemini, and xAI Grok — and records whether each one cited you. Re-runs reuse the locked query set so before/after deltas are real.
- [5]Every score weight in our scanner is one entry in a typed registry with a date-stamped lastReviewed field and a 90-day staleness check. Heuristic magnitudes are marked as heuristics; we don't invent citations to dress them up. That's the credibility moat.
Compiled from public information, May 2026. Not affiliated with any tool listed; names belong to their owners. Tools change fast — if something here is out of date, tell us and we'll fix it.
/ WHAT £5 ACTUALLY BUYS
The cheapest tier is a real audit, not a teaser.
£5 — Single report
- Full 137-signal audit on one URL
- Copy-paste fix for every issue (JSON-LD, robots, llms.txt, meta)
- Projected score lift per fix — not just ‘do this’
- Downloadable PDF, owner's record
- Sector benchmark (where corpus n ≥ 5)
- No ongoing monitoring — that's the £5/mo Watcher tier
For comparison: $29/mo for a year
- $348 annual cost at $29/mo (EZY entry)
- ~£270 in GBP equivalent
- = 54 of our £5 one-off reports for the same money
- or 5 years of our £5/mo Watcher tier
We're not claiming the products are identical — they're not. EZY auto-deploys, we audit and certify. We're saying: if you want the deep cited audit + fix list, you can get it for the price of a coffee. Subscribe later when you actually need monitoring.
/ AND VS THE CLASSIC SEO TOOLS
Adjacent to your SEO stack — not a replacement.
If you already pay for Ahrefs, Semrush, or Screaming Frog — keep them. They're excellent at backlinks, rank tracking, and broad site crawls. They weren't built to audit the AI-search layer, and they don't.
Classic SEO answers: does Google index you? We answer: do LLMs cite you, and what's blocking them? Different questions, both worth answering.
| FEATURE | AI Search Ready | Ahrefs | Semrush (full) | Screaming Frog |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Entry price[6] | From £5, one-off | $129+ / mo | $139+ / mo | £239 / yr |
| Crawls keyword rankings (Google SERP) | ||||
| Backlink index + competitor link gap | ||||
| Site-wide technical crawl (broken links, redirects)[7] | ||||
| AI crawler permissions audit (GPTBot, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot...)[8] | ||||
| Schema deprecation + nested-field validation (sector-aware)[9] | ||||
| llms.txt + AI-grounding signal audit | ||||
| Citation probe — does ChatGPT/Claude/Perplexity/Gemini/Grok actually cite you? | ||||
| Per-issue fix code (JSON-LD, robots, meta) | ||||
| Public AI-readiness certification + embeddable badge |
/ RECEIPTS (CLASSIC SEO)
- [6]Classic SEO suite pricing (lowest published tier, May 2026). Ahrefs Lite, Semrush Pro, Screaming Frog SEO Spider licence (per seat, annual). These tools earn their price for rank tracking + backlinks; we're not arguing they don't. We're arguing they don't audit the AI-search layer.
- [7]Our Deep Audit (£29) crawls sitemap, clusters URLs into templates, samples one per cluster, and flags site-wide template bugs (issues firing on ≥50% of pages). That's deliberately narrower than Screaming Frog's full-site crawl — Screaming Frog wins outright on raw breadth. We win on signal density per crawled page.
- [8]Our scanner audits 15+ AI crawler user-agents (GPTBot, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot, Google-Extended, OAI-SearchBot, Meta-ExternalAgent, etc.) against robots.txt with full longest-match resolution. Classic SEO tools audit Googlebot + Bingbot; the AI bots are invisible to them by design.
- [9]Classic SEO crawlers validate JSON-LD presence and basic syntax. None we've tested check whether HowTo is deprecated, whether Product has nested offers.price, or whether your sector is eligible for FinancialProduct rich results. ‘Partial’ here is generous.
The honest pitch: if you're ranking on Google but losing share to AI chat (or worried you will), the gap isn't in your SEO stack — it's in the layer underneath it. Schema deprecation, AI crawler permissions, llms.txt, citation reality. That's what we audit. £5 to find out where you stand.
The cited, certifiable one.
See your two scores in 30 seconds — no signup. Every issue comes with the fix, and when you pass you earn a public badge none of the others offer.
Run a free scan