What Does Writesonic Actually Track in AI Search?

Writesonic started as an AI writing tool and now sells itself as an AI search visibility platform, which makes it one of the few products in this category with a public price and a real self-serve checkout. That alone puts it ahead of most of the bracket.

The reviews on page one have noticed the pivot. Nine of them list the tiers, quote the prompt limits, and describe the ten platforms it tracks.

Not one of them opens the second pricing page.

We sell no platform. We run the measurement and the content work behind it for clients, so the only question we care about is whether the thing you are about to buy can carry the decision you are buying it for.

For this one, answering that means reading both pricing pages at once.

What does Writesonic actually track in AI search?

Writesonic tracks brand visibility frequency, sentiment, citations and share of voice in AI answers, refreshed daily. Its AI visibility tracker page names ten engines. Its brand pricing page grants three of them, ChatGPT, Gemini and Google AI Overviews, on every self-serve tier. All ten requires Enterprise.

That gap is the post.

The ten-platform number on the product page is not the plan you are about to buy. It is the plan you have to call about.

The ten-platform figure describes the Enterprise configuration

This is not a hidden clause. It sits on the pricing table in plain type. It just does not appear in the reviews, because reviews read the product page and buyers read the checkout.

All three self-serve brand tiers track the same three platforms

Starter at $79 a month, Basic at $199 and Growth at $399 all carry the same engine list: ChatGPT, Gemini and Google AI Overviews. Quadrupling the price buys more prompts, more answers, more seats and sentiment analysis. It buys no additional engines.

Perplexity, Claude, Copilot, Grok, DeepSeek, Meta AI and Google AI Mode are Enterprise, quoted rather than published.

One published review states that Growth jumps to ten or more platforms. Writesonic's own pricing table says three. Where a review and a vendor's checkout disagree, buy from the checkout.

The agency plan at $200 tracks nine platforms, then pauses

Writesonic runs a second pricing page for agencies, and the numbers on it invert the first one. Agency Starter costs $200 a month and tracks nine of the ten engines, everything except Claude.

So $200 sees nine engines and $399 sees three, on the same platform, in the same month.

The catch is real and it is on the agency side. Agency Starter is built for prospecting: pitch projects run one to seven days and then auto-pause, with 2,000 answers a month across the account. Converting a pitch into an ongoing tracked project is quoted separately at $150 per project per month.

The nine-engine view is priced to win the account, not to track it.

The answers quota is dimensioned to the digit for three platforms

The prompt count is the number every review quotes. The answers count is the one that binds, and it is the one nobody multiplies out.

A full daily pass costs prompts times platforms. On three platforms that is:

• •Starter: 50 prompts needs 150 answers a day. It grants 50.
• •Basic: 100 prompts needs 300 answers a day. It grants 300.
• •Growth: 200 prompts needs 600 answers a day. It grants 600.

Two of the three fit exactly, to the digit. That exactness is the strongest available confirmation that one answer means one engine response to one prompt, and that the self-serve engine count really is three.

Follow the same reading down to Starter and it is short by a factor of three. Fifty prompts on three engines cannot run daily on a fifty-answer allowance. Each prompt-engine cell gets read once every three days.

Writesonic does not define an answer on the pricing page, so this reading is an inference. It is the only one under which two of three tiers land on round exact numbers.

What every Writesonic review asks:

• •What does each tier cost per month?
• •How many prompts can I track?
• •How does it compare against Profound or Semrush?
• •Is the AI writer any good?

What the platform count actually decides:

• •Which engines does my dashboard have no opinion about?
• •How long until a number on it stops wobbling?
• •Am I reading the densest citation surface or the thinnest?
• •Does the cheaper agency page solve this, and at what cost?

Every review answers the first list. The second list decides whether the dashboard is telling you anything.

6 things the three-platform default decides that no Writesonic review mentions

None of these are defects. Each one follows from packaging seven engines behind a sales call, which is a pricing choice with consequences the feature list does not show.

Consequence #1: The engine held back is the densest citation surface we measured

Our concluded CITE Index study ran 500 buyer prompts nightly through ChatGPT, Gemini and Google AI Mode for 63 days, collecting 90,132 AI answers across 10 consumer categories.

Google AI Mode carried a source in 97.4% of those answers. ChatGPT carried one in 92.5%. Gemini carried one in 79.1%.

Google AI Mode is the Enterprise engine. Gemini, the weakest of the three we measured, is on every tier. Roughly one in five Gemini answers in our corpus cited nothing at all, which means a fifth of that engine's coverage produces no citation data to read. The full corpus sits in the final report.

Consequence #2: Google AI Overviews and Google AI Mode are not the same surface

The self-serve list includes Google AI Overviews. It does not include Google AI Mode. Reviews treat these as one Google line item and they are two different products with different citation behaviour.

If your buyers have moved to AI Mode, a tracker covering only AI Overviews reports on the surface they left.

Consequence #3: A daily refresh does not mean a daily-usable reading

Writesonic refreshes daily and shows a seven-day trend. The refresh is real. What it cannot do is make a small sample settle faster.

In July 2026 Ronald Sielinski published From Stochastic to Stable, which tested 30 platform-topic combinations on Gemini, SearchGPT and Perplexity. Twenty-seven converged inside a 125-response window, at median convergence orders of 42 responses for Gemini, 37 for SearchGPT and 51 for Perplexity. Three never settled.

At one answer per prompt-engine per day, Basic and Growth reach the Gemini median in 42 days. Starter, running a third of a pass, takes 126. It is an unreviewed preprint and the exact figures will not transfer to your category. The order of magnitude will.

A chart that redraws every morning and settles every six weeks is showing you the same number in a new colour.

Consequence #4: Sentiment is gated to Growth, which changes the entry price

Sentiment analysis is not on Starter or Basic. Neither is prompt diversification. If sentiment is the reason you are buying, the real entry price is $399, not $79.

That matters because sentiment is usually the metric that survives a budget review. It is the one a CMO reads without translation.

Consequence #5: GA4 and Looker are Enterprise, so the data stays in the dashboard

GA4 integration and Looker Studio export sit on Enterprise only, alongside SSO and SOC 2 Type II.

On the self-serve tiers the numbers live where Writesonic put them. Any board deck that needs AI visibility beside organic and paid gets built by hand, every month, by a person.

Consequence #6: The number was probably never the thing holding the program back

Across our 63 days the category leader flipped on only 18.7% of day pairs, and in four of the ten categories it never changed once. The average category leader appeared in 78.2% of its own category's answers.

That is incumbency, not instrumentation. A tracker that reads three engines slowly costs you less than the arithmetic above suggests, which is the good news here and also an argument against paying for the tenth engine before you have moved the first one.

Where the content half fits, and why it complicates the comparison

Most of this category sells measurement alone. Writesonic sells measurement plus an article generator plus an Action Center, and that bundle is the honest reason to consider it.

The AI articles quota runs 15 a month on Starter, 25 on Basic and 50 on Growth. Site audits run 10, 20 and 50, covering 100, 1,200 and 2,500 pages per audit. Nothing in the AEO-native bracket ships that, and for a small team with no content resource it is a real saving.

Two things to weigh against it. Generated articles are the cheapest thing in your program to produce and the hardest to get cited, which is the same trap we described in why ChatGPT skips your brand blog. And a bundle makes attribution harder, because when the number moves you cannot tell whether the tracking, the articles or the audits did it.

Buying the measurement and the thing being measured from one vendor is convenient until you need to know which half worked.

Sizing a Writesonic evaluation before you take the trial

The diagnostic half is done. Here is the sequence we run with clients evaluating this product specifically.

Step 1: Run your ten highest-intent prompts by hand across all ten engines

Before you take a trial, open ChatGPT, Gemini, Google AI Overviews, Google AI Mode, Perplexity, Claude, Copilot, Grok, DeepSeek and Meta AI, and ask the same ten shortlist-stage questions your buyers ask. Record where you appear and every domain cited.

Two hours of this tells you whether the three self-serve engines cover your category or miss it, which is the only number that matters in this evaluation.

Step 2: Count how many of your engines sit behind the Enterprise line

Take the list from step 1 and split it against the self-serve three. If nothing outside ChatGPT, Gemini and Google AI Overviews carries your category, the $199 tier is honestly priced and you can stop reading.

If Perplexity or Claude carries your buyers, price the Enterprise quote before you compare against anything else.

Step 3: Ask what one tracked answer buys, in writing

Ask whether an answer is one engine response to one prompt, or one prompt across all engines. Then ask what happens when the daily allowance runs out: does the pass truncate, queue, or drop prompts.

The arithmetic in this post assumes the first reading. Confirm it on a quote rather than on a blog post, including ours.

Step 4: Multiply your prompt set by your engines by your cadence

Take your prompt count, multiply by the engines step 1 says matter, and compare the product against the daily answers allowance on the tier you are considering.

Twenty prompts on three engines is 60 answers a day and fits anywhere. Fifty prompts on nine engines is 450 a day, which no self-serve brand tier grants. We covered which prompts earn a slot in how to select prompts for LLM tracking.

Step 5: Price the agency page against the brand page for your own use

If you are an agency, or a brand with an agency, compare Agency Starter at $200 against Growth at $399 for the same account. Nine engines against three changes the calculation.

Then ask what the auto-pause does after seven days, and what the $150 per project per month conversion covers, because that is where the agency saving goes.

Step 6: Fund the earned half from the same budget line

Whatever the licence costs, hold back a matching share for the work that puts you inside other people's pages: earned mentions, comparison placements, review-site position, community presence.

In our corpus, four of the twelve most-cited domains were brand-owned, which means eight were not. Reddit alone drew 14,698 citations and appeared in 13.6% of all 90,132 answers. Split the budget when you sign rather than after the first flat quarter. That split is the reason a managed GEO agency sits beside tooling rather than inside it.

Where Writesonic fits, by what each option constrains

Option	What it constrains	Right when
Writesonic Starter, $79	Answers. 50 a day against 150 needed for its own 50 prompts on three engines	Never, for measurement. It reads a third of its own prompt set and carries no sentiment.
Writesonic Basic, $199	Engines. Three, and no sentiment analysis	Your buyers sit on ChatGPT and Google, and you want articles and site audits in the same seat.
Writesonic Growth, $399	Engines again. Still three, now with sentiment	You need sentiment and 200 prompts, and the seven gated engines genuinely do not carry your category.
Writesonic Agency Starter, $200	Duration. Pitch projects auto-pause after seven days	You are auditing prospects rather than tracking clients, and nine engines for $200 is the point.
Writesonic Enterprise	Price, which is quoted rather than published	You need all ten engines, GA4 and Looker, SSO and SOC 2 Type II in one contract.
Peec AI	Three of six engines on every self-serve tier, with Claude held for Enterprise	You want unlimited seats on a similar engine count. What Peec tracks covers the gating.
AthenaHQ	Prompt count. Nine engines at daily cadence leaves about 13 prompts on $295 a month	You need daily depth on engines the cheaper tools cannot reach. The credit arithmetic is worked out in full.
A managed program	Nothing, if scoped right. It costs a retainer	The measurement was never the bottleneck and nobody owns the weekly loop.

The six jobs to score any of these against sit in the AI visibility platform buyer's guide, and the rest of the field is mapped in our survey of GEO tooling for 2026. If two tools on your shortlist are already reporting different numbers, we covered why in why LLM visibility tools disagree. For the enterprise bracket, the same arithmetic applied to an annual credit allowance sits in what Conductor AI actually measures.

FAQ

What is Writesonic?

Writesonic is an AI content platform that added a full AI search visibility product and now markets itself as an AI search growth engine. It tracks brand visibility, sentiment, citations and share of voice in AI answers, generates articles, and runs site audits. It also ships an Action Center that turns findings into on-page and off-page tasks, though that is gated to Growth as a trial and Enterprise in full.

How much does Writesonic cost?

Brand plans run $79 a month for Starter, $199 for Basic and $399 for Growth, all billed annually, with Enterprise quoted. A separate agency page starts at $200 a month. Extra users cost $50 each per month and 20 additional articles cost $100. Annual billing saves 20%. Writesonic is one of the few products in this category that publishes a price at all, which is worth crediting before you criticise the tiers.

Is Writesonic good for GEO?

It depends entirely on which engines carry your buyers. On every self-serve brand tier it tracks ChatGPT, Gemini and Google AI Overviews, so if your category lives on those three it is fairly priced and the bundled articles and audits are a genuine saving. If Perplexity, Claude, Copilot or Google AI Mode matters to you, the self-serve tiers do not see it and you are into an Enterprise conversation.

How many AI platforms does Writesonic track?

Ten in total, but not on the plan most people buy. The three self-serve brand tiers each track three: ChatGPT, Gemini and Google AI Overviews. All ten sits on Enterprise. The agency page is the exception: Agency Starter at $200 a month tracks nine, everything except Claude, on pitch projects that auto-pause after one to seven days. Check the pricing table rather than the product page.

What are the best Writesonic alternatives?

For AI visibility alone the names that come up are Profound, Peec AI, Otterly, AthenaHQ, Rankscale, Scrunch AI and Ahrefs Brand Radar. For the enterprise SEO plus AEO combination, Conductor, BrightEdge and Semrush. Compare on answers per prompt per engine per month rather than on headline price, and ask each one which engines are included on the tier you would actually sign.

The bottom line

Writesonic did the thing this category mostly refuses to do. It published a price, built a real checkout, and let you start without a sales call.

Then it put the platform count on one page and the platform gating on another, and every review on page one read only the first.

Do step 1 before you take the trial. If your ten highest-intent prompts come back carrying ChatGPT, Gemini and Google AI Overviews, this is a well-priced product and the bundled content half is a bonus. If Perplexity or Claude is where your buyers are, the $399 tier does not see them and the $200 agency tier only sees them for a week.

After that, go do the work no licence covers. Nothing in the software writes the answer block, fixes the passage the model could not extract, or earns the third-party mention that puts you in the source pool. An AI visibility audit will show you which of those your gap sits in before you sign for a year of anything.