Veribix vs Otterly
What each product measures, from which data source, and what neither of them can see. Everything stated about Otterly here comes from Otterly's own site.
What Otterly measures
Otterly runs your prompts daily against four AI search engines and reports how your brand shows up. Its plans are priced by prompt count — fifteen on Lite, a hundred on Standard, four hundred on Premium — with engine coverage held constant across tiers, which is an unusually clean structure in this category.
From the Standard plan it exposes an API and MCP access, so the data can be pulled into your own reporting rather than lived with in a dashboard. Agent Analytics appears at the same tier.
What Veribix measures
Veribix reads the systems you already own. Your GA4 property supplies sessions, key events and revenue by landing page and source; your server logs or Cloudflare analytics supply AI crawler activity; Search Console supplies search context. From those it builds a per-assistant funnel and shows the evidence behind each figure.
The practical difference is what happens after an assistant names you. Otterly tells you that it did. Veribix tells you whether anyone arrived, what they did, and what it was worth — and marks the part it cannot attribute rather than filling it in.
What neither can see
Before comparing features it is worth naming the limits both approaches share, because a vendor that does not name them is not being straight with you.
Referrer stripping is the first, and it bites hardest on exactly the assistants people care about. When an outbound link arrives with the referring page removed, the visit shows up in your analytics as direct. Daily polling tells you the answer named you; nothing recovers the connection to the session that followed.
The second is the mention nobody clicked. Otterly will show it and cannot tell you whether it moved anything. Veribix will show the sessions that arrived and cannot see the mentions that produced no visit. These are genuinely different blind spots and it is the reason the two views disagree in interesting ways.
The third is variance between runs, which daily sampling handles better than most. Reading a daily series as a distribution rather than as a sequence of facts is the correct way to use it, and it is also how Veribix reports presence — a share of runs with the count attached, never a single settled number.
Otterly published pricing
| Plan | Published price | Note |
|---|---|---|
| Lite | $29 / month | 15 search prompts. $25/month billed annually. |
| Standard | $189 / month | 100 prompts, API and MCP access. $160/month billed annually. |
| Premium | $489 / month | 400 prompts. $422/month billed annually. |
| Enterprise | Custom | Adds SSO, dedicated customer success and personalised onboarding. |
Otterly pricing and features read from the vendor’s own site on 2026-08-06. Prices and features change. If anything here is out of date, tell us and we will correct it.
Questions
- Is Veribix cheaper than Otterly?
- At the entry point they are not comparable in a useful way: Otterly's Lite plan is $29 a month for fifteen prompts, and Veribix's entry point is a free audit rather than a cheap tier. Compare on the paid tiers and on what each one measures.
- Does Veribix track daily like Otterly?
- First-party ingest runs daily on paid plans. Answer polling frequency depends on the plan and on how many prompts are branded, because branded prompts cannot be shared across the corpus.
- Can I export Veribix data?
- Yes, including the evidence trail behind each figure. Export is self-serve and remains available after cancellation.
Already using Otterly and weighing a change? See Otterly alternatives.