AI Visibility Tools for Agencies (2026): Who Has Real Multi-Client Plans, Who Has White Label, and What It Costs Per Client

01The short answer

For an agency running AI visibility as a service line, the shortlist is Peec, Otterly, Rankscale and Scrunch among the trackers, SE Ranking if your clients also buy SEO from you, and Linkeddit if the service you sell is fixing the gap rather than reporting it. Peec has the cleanest multi-client model on paper: projects per tier and agency bundles with one bill and prompts you allocate across clients. Rankscale has the only white-label dashboard links we could verify. Otterly is the cheapest way to give each client a workspace. Scrunch has an agency tier and a review base full of agencies, at twice the price.

Two warnings before the matrix. White label, the thing one consultant literally typed into Google to find this page, is offered by fewer vendors than their marketing implies, and SE Ranking’s own knowledge base says its white label does not yet cover its AI visibility product. And Claude is Enterprise-only at Peec, Profound and Scrunch, which matters if your clients’ buyers use it.

02What the agency job actually needs

Four things, in the order agencies raise them in the review threads we read for the single-tool reviews. Separation: one client cannot see another’s prompts, competitors or results, which means a project or workspace per client, not a filter. Something to show the client: a link, an export or a report they open without a seat, ideally with the agency’s name on it. A unit that scales: prompts, credits or seats that can be allocated across clients without buying a new plan each time. Something billable after the report: a reason the client keeps paying once they have seen the number.

The Scrunch review describes the loop several agency reviewers run: audit a prospect, show the gap, sign the retainer, report monthly. The Rankscale review quotes an agency head whose clients want to know which specific queries trigger a mention or citation. The SE Ranking review quotes an agency owner choosing on price for many brands. Those three are the agency job, and the matrix below is built for them.

03Nine tools on the agency dimensions, read on the day

Semrush’s AI Toolkit is not in the table because its agency answer is arithmetic: $99 a month per domain, so ten clients is $990 before anything else, with no multi-client structure described on the page we read. HubSpot AEO at $50 describes no agency features. Ahrefs Brand Radar sells checks and an index rather than client workspaces.

04Tool by tool, for the agency job

Peec AI. The pricing page is addressed to “marketing teams and SEO agencies” and claims 3,000 or more brands and agencies. The multi-client model is projects: 1 on Starter, 2 on Pro, 5 on Advanced, unlimited on Enterprise, with unlimited users and per-project access levels including read-only. The FAQ answers the agency question directly: “Agencies can manage multiple client projects under one bundle, with centralized billing and flexible prompt allocation,” and prompts “can be shared across your account, allowing you to allocate it to different projects or brands as needed.” A “Running a GEO agency? See agency pricing” link leads to a call. Claude is Enterprise only; the six self-serve models are ChatGPT, AI Mode, AI Overviews, Copilot, Perplexity and Gemini. Its MCP is documented with read and write tools. Our Peec review has the tier limits.

Otterly. The cheapest way to give each client a workspace: Lite at $29 has one workspace, upper tiers unlimited, and every tier has unlimited team members. An Agency Partners programme promises “the tools to scale GEO across your client portfolio” with prompt allowances the Wave 8 pricing notes record at 150 and 500. Claude is an add-on at $29, $109 or $439 by tier, which an agency has to price per client. The Otterly review quotes an agency reviewer on its prompt research tool.

Rankscale. The one with a verifiable white-label answer: “Share your brand dashboard with clients and partners via a configurable link,” listed as white-labelled dashboard links, plus unlimited seats, team workspaces, a public partner agency directory, affiliate commissions and client discounts, agency webinars and a private Slack channel. Its MCP is read-only by design. Seventeen engines with Claude on every plan. The learning curve is the recurring complaint in its OMR reviews, most of which come from agencies. Pro is $99 for 1,200 credits; the Rankscale review prices programme shapes on it.

Scrunch AI. Core $250 with 125 prompts, an Agency Core tier the Wave 8 notes record at $500, and custom brand workspaces and user licences above that. The review base is unusually agency-heavy and describes the audit-to-retainer loop; the same reviewers complain there is no chart export so they screenshot. Claude, plus Meta AI, AI Mode and Grok, are Enterprise. The Scrunch review notes a beginner agency thread on r/aeo that shortlisted it and chose elsewhere.

AthenaHQ. A free tier that is genuinely free at 300 credits, then a jump to $295. The plans page lists an Enterprises and Agencies tier with unlimited seats and role-based access control, and the review notes branded PDF exports for clients. Ten engines on Starter including Claude on the free tier, which no one else offers. The AthenaHQ review weighs the free-to-$295 gap.

SE Ranking. If your clients already buy SEO from you, this is the one connection: AI visibility on five engines inside the SEO platform, an Agency Pack at $69 a year, an Agency Catalog listing, connectors to Data Studio, AgencyAnalytics and Whatagraph, and an MCP server included in every plan. The catch is in its own knowledge base: the Agency Pack white label “does not yet apply to SE Visible”, the AI visibility product. Claude is not covered; the FAQ says coming. The SE Ranking review prices ten client brands with white label at $437 or more and explains the two-product split.

Profound. The reference product for the job and the most expensive to run for many clients: Starter is one engine, Growth $399 adds Perplexity and AI Overviews, and the FAQ describes an Agency Growth plan at 400 credits per client workspace with more than three people meaning Enterprise. Claude, the API and Shopping are Enterprise. The Profound pricing page has the per-prompt maths.

BrandPeek. Named for completeness: white-label reporting is listed on its $350 Scale tier and marked coming soon, alongside an API also marked coming soon. Its free plan is real. No independent review of it existed when we reviewed it.

Linkeddit. Ours. One project per client domain with its own prompts, competitors, schedule and Search Console connection; one brief across every active project; share links to one gap, run, fix or a project’s metrics for a client with no seat, summary only, 30 days, revocable. No agency tier, no white label, and we say so on the agencies page. What the others do not have: the fix loop, drafted from the evidence the run recorded, source-checked, human-approved and re-measured, and every one of those steps callable from Claude or Cursor. Included with the Compete plan at $99.

05Pricing one client on each, with the printed numbers

Take one realistic client: ten unbranded buying questions, the four engines a B2B buyer actually uses (ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini and Claude), measured weekly. Here is what that shape costs on each tool using only the figures printed on the pricing pages on 4 September 2026, and where the shape is not for sale at any printed price.

Read the table for the shape of the invoice rather than the total. Peec and Otterly charge you as clients multiply projects and add-ons. Rankscale and Linkeddit charge you as measured samples accumulate, so a small client is cheap and a large one is not. Profound and Scrunch charge you by tier and hold Claude back for Enterprise. The right tool is the one whose unit matches how your clients grow, and the wrong one is the one that looked cheapest at one client.

06The white-label question, honestly

A brand consultant typed this into Google and landed on our site 27 times over the summer: “which ai monitoring vendors produce client-ready reporting an agency can put its name on?” Here is the answer the vendors’ own pages support on 4 September 2026.

Yes, verifiable: Rankscale, through white-labelled dashboard links on its agency programme. Yes, with a catch: SE Ranking, whose Agency Pack white label covers the SEO platform and not yet SE Visible. Coming soon: BrandPeek, on its top tier. Not described: Peec, Otterly, Scrunch, AthenaHQ and Profound, which offer workspaces, per-project access or branded exports instead. No: Linkeddit, whose share links show a Linkeddit page with your project’s summary.

The practical route most agencies take, and the one we would recommend on our own product, is to read the data through the tool’s API or MCP server and produce the client report in the agency’s own template. Peec, Rankscale, SE Ranking and Linkeddit expose MCP servers that make that a prompt rather than an integration project. It is a real workflow. It is not white label, and no vendor should let you call it that in a proposal.

07Which one, for which agency

A GEO agency with many clients and no Claude requirement: Peec, for the project structure and the bundle billing; Otterly if the budget per client is smaller and a workspace each is enough.

An agency that must hand clients a branded dashboard: Rankscale, the only verifiable white-label link on the list, with the learning curve its own reviewers warn about, or SE Ranking once its white label reaches SE Visible.

An SEO agency adding AI visibility to an existing SEO retainer: SE Ranking, one platform and one MCP connection for both, with the Claude gap noted.

An agency whose service is fixing the gap, not reporting it: Linkeddit, because the fix loop is the billable part and it is callable from the assistant your team already uses. Bring your own report template; the share link is for the client who wants one number this week.

08Frequently asked questions