The Prompting Company vs Profound 2026
The Prompting Company publishes prices from $99/mo and tests coding agents. Profound shows only a free trial and custom Enterprise. Limits, engines, and who should pick which.
Both vendors raised venture money to sell AI visibility to larger companies, and both now sell more than a tracker. Profound sells marketing agents for content, demand, and PR, with AI answer tracking as one channel; its own pricing page says it is not only for AI search. The Prompting Company sells discovery plus "agent experience": whether coding agents and assistants can find your product and then actually use it.
In our ranking Profound sits above The Prompting Company, mostly on engine coverage and its demand data. Neither is near the top. Both rank below Promptwatch, AthenaHQ, and Scrunch AI.
Sources: promptingcompany.com pricing, home, and enterprise pages, checked 24 October 2026; Profound figures from our catalog entry (pricing read 24 October 2026); promptwatch.com/llms.txt, re-checked 21 October 2026.
Side by side
| The Prompting Company | Profound | |
|---|---|---|
| Public prices | Basic $99, Pro $299, White-glove $3,000/mo; Enterprise custom | Free 7-day trial; Enterprise custom |
| Earlier estimate | Not needed; every self-serve tier is priced | About $40k a year for Enterprise (not on current page) |
| Entry coverage | 25 prompts; ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini | Trial: 50 prompts daily; ChatGPT, Gemini, AI Overviews |
| Top coverage | Adds Google AI, Claude, DeepSeek, Claude Code, Codex, OpenCode | Up to nine answer engines on Enterprise |
| Coding agents | Yes, from White-glove | Not listed |
| Demand data | Not documented | Prompt Volumes dataset |
| Agents | Agent Experience audit; Radar (Enterprise) | Marketing agents for AEO, content, demand, PR |
| Content | 8 articles on Pro, 50 on White-glove | Content agents on credits |
| Security | SOC 2 Type II; SAML SSO on Enterprise | SSO/SAML and SOC 2 on Enterprise |
| Crawler logs | Not documented | Not documented on our listing |
| Conversion tracking | Via Google Analytics or PostHog | Not documented on our listing |
Pricing: one shows its hand
The Prompting Company lets you buy without a call. White-glove at $3,000/mo comes to $36,000 a year, close to the earlier $40k estimate for Profound Enterprise, and that tier is fully managed with 50 articles, weekly reports, and a specialist on a 24-hour SLA. That is a concrete reference point for procurement.
Profound's page shows a free trial that runs 50 prompts daily for seven days on a recommended prompt set, then Enterprise. It mentions a self-serve Agency Growth plan with 400 credits a month per client workspace but lists no price for it. Expect a sales cycle.
Where Profound is ahead
Engine coverage at the top. Enterprise runs up to nine answer engines, and our listing names Claude, Copilot, Grok, Meta AI, DeepSeek, and AI Mode among them. The Prompting Company's plan table does not list Grok, Copilot, or Meta AI at any tier.
Prompt Volumes is the other edge. Profound estimates real query demand per prompt, which tells you which questions are worth tracking at all. The Prompting Company's closest equivalent is Radar, which clusters public videos, threads, and posts into topics and turns them into prompts, and Radar is Enterprise only.
Where The Prompting Company is ahead
Coding agents. Claude Code, Codex, and OpenCode appear in its White-glove plan, and its FAQ lists Muse, GrokBot, Instinct, and Dots as personal agents. Profound's listing names none of them.
Agent usability testing has no counterpart on Profound's listing. The Agent Experience audit maps tasks an agent runs for a user and shows where your API setup, docs, or error messages trip it up. The public Agent Experience Benchmark runs a coding agent against your docs in a fresh sandbox and scores it with an independent judge.
Its audience is also clearer. The vendor says its best fit is devtools, infrastructure, and software with an MCP server, CLI, API, or SDK. TechCrunch's October 2025 coverage named Rippling, Vapi, and Traceloop among early customers, mostly fintech, devtools, and enterprise SaaS.
What neither documents
Neither vendor documents CDN crawler-log connectors or a crawl-to-citation path. Neither documents citation analytics broken out by page, Reddit, or YouTube. Neither names CMS publishing to Webflow, Framer, or WordPress. Those are the layers that decide whether a citation turns into a visit, and they are where Promptwatch is strongest: crawler logs from Professional ($245/mo), a first-party visitor script with conversion tracking, and Content Agents with a review inbox.
Who should pick which
Enterprise marketing team buying a broad agent program. Profound, if AI search is one of several channels and you want its demand dataset.
Developer-tools company whose users choose through coding agents. The Prompting Company. Profound lists nothing that tests whether an agent can complete onboarding.
Team that wants to see prices before a demo. The Prompting Company, or better, Promptwatch with a free plan and 7-day trials.
Brand that needs every engine plus traffic proof. Promptwatch. Paid plans run ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Perplexity, Grok, Llama, DeepSeek, Mistral, Copilot, AI Overviews, and AI Mode, from $95/mo.
Verdict
Profound wins on coverage and demand data, at a price you only learn on a call. The Prompting Company wins on coding agents and transparency. For the measurement most teams actually need, neither is the first stop. Start with Promptwatch and add one of these only if its specialty is your main channel.