In short
- tracking tool
- A tool that establishes whether your brand appears in AI answers, and stops there. RankShift, Peec AI and Otterly.ai belong to this group.
- execution
- Actually applying a fix to your site or channel, instead of recommending it.
- approval gate
- The gate between a proposed change and a published one. Only you open it, and there is always a way back.
- retest
- Asking the same prompts again, in the same market and the same language. The only proof that a fix changed anything.
- mentioned · cited · chosen
- The three outcomes ceeme counts separately instead of adding up: your name appears, your source is cited, you are recommended.
What is the difference between ceeme and a tracking tool?
A tracking tool stops where the work starts. It shows you that you are absent from four of your thirty prompts; what you do next is your problem. ceeme measures the same thing, supplies the fix and can carry it out — within scope, with an approval gate in front of it and a way back behind it.
That is not a complaint. Measuring is a craft, they are good at it, and on several points they do it better than we do — the next section lists them. But it is why comparing engine counts leads nowhere: that number says nothing about what happens to a gap once you have found it.
| Capability | ceeme | Tracking tools RankShift · Peec · Otterly | SEO agency or consultant | Doing it yourself with ChatGPT or Claude |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Measuring per prompt, per engine, per market | prompts without the brand name in them | their core strength | usually by hand | one-off questions, no series |
| Why an engine chooses | Decision Drivers per factor | mostly what and where | a human's interpretation | no fixed factors |
| Public signals: reviews, directories, forums, Wikidata | measured and tracked | limited outside the engines | depends on the agency | not systematically |
| Entity clarity and hallucination alerts | confusion and inventions kept apart | sometimes present, rarely managed | if the agency watches for it | no entity management |
| Design trust | its own meter, with screen evidence | not offered | sometimes via a UX partner | not measured |
| Exact fixes: schema, FAQ, llms.txt, content | ready to apply, one by one | recommendations or drafts | delivered as a project | you write and publish everything yourself |
| Execution with an approval gate and rollback | within scope, with a way back | tools measure, they do not execute | by hand, rarely with rollback | everything by hand |
| Retest on the same prompt set | weekly, with before and after | also a strong point of theirs | usually a report | no fixed baseline |
| GA4, Search Console and Looker Studio | connected where available | varies per tool | reporting per agency | not connected |
| Roles, approvals and an audit trail | every step remains traceable | dashboards, few approvals | varies per agency | no trace |
| Sector rules for healthcare, education, public sector, licensed professions | hard rules per pack | no sector rules | depends on the agency | none |
| An answer straight away, without setup | free scan first, no account | set up an account and prompts | a call or audit first | immediately, no onboarding |
| A human who thinks along with you | product plus ProOps guidance | a tool, not a strategist | what an agency is genuinely good at | only as good as your own prompts |
| Dutch and French, treated equally | site, scan, report and dashboard | measures many languages, English interface | in Belgium usually a given | a model speaks both |
✓ full · ~ partial · — absent
Data on other tools: checked against their public websites in July 2026. Something no longer accurate? Email us and we will fix it.
Where are RankShift, Peec AI and Otterly.ai stronger than ceeme?
On these points. They are here because a comparison that only lists its own merits convinces no reader — and a model recognises it as advertising and skips it. This block is what carries the rest of the page.
| Tool | Where they are stronger than ceeme |
|---|---|
| RankShift | Belgian (Deerlijk), and unusually generous: unlimited projects and seats on every plan. For a technical team it is the strongest of the three — a documented MCP server, a REST API with a BI layer, native connections to Looker Studio, Tableau and Power BI. It measures across nine models and closes the loop with content briefs and an AI writer. If you want rich measurement and drafts in the same breath, it is hard to look past. |
| Peec AI | Berlin-based, and strong at measuring. Sentiment scoring on a fine scale, updated daily and shown prominently. We measure the same thing in three values and do not display it as a headline figure — finer and more visible with them. Add daily tracking, source analysis per URL, unlimited seats and measurement in more than fourteen languages at country level. Agencies tracking many brands rate it highly (4.9/5 on G2). |
| Otterly.ai | The lowest entry point in the category: $29 a month, which is cheaper than ceeme once the free scan is behind you. Strong on citation analysis — link, source and domain citations, the thing that separates a vanity metric from a real GEO tool. Unlimited seats, Agent Analytics for bot and agent traffic, measurement across more than fifty countries. If you simply want the cheapest transparent way to start measuring, this is it. |
What does ceeme cost, and what do you get for it?
Four routes, and for each one what it does not do. That boundary is not fine print: it is enforced in the code. Watch never delivers a fix pack, DIY delivers the fix but does not apply it, and ProOps applies it but never without your approval.
Coming from a tracking tool, an agency or doing it yourself?
Then this is where you land. The left column is your current situation, the middle one the route closest to it.
| Coming from | At ceeme | Why there |
|---|---|---|
| Entry-level monitoring at a tracking tool | Watch Core | The same entry point: measuring and alerts, monthly. |
| More volume, more competitors | Watch Market | More prompts, source shifts and the competitors that show up. |
| The top tier of your current tool | Watch Board | Volume, board view and exports for whoever has to report. |
| Multiple clients or white-label | Watch Agency | Multi-client dashboard and client approvals. Priced to fit. |
| A one-off audit with a roadmap | DeepScan Ops | The same depth, but with a baseline you can repeat later. |
| Advice from an SEO agency, execution elsewhere | ProOps Guided | Strategy, QA and prioritisation — and execution no longer has to change hands. |
| Prompting yourself in ChatGPT or Claude | Free scan, then Watch or DIY | Without a fixed prompt set and without a retest you are measuring a mood, not a change. |
What does ceeme not do?
Anyone reading a comparison page is looking for the catch. Here it is, in the same table and just as wide as the rest.
| What ceeme does | What ceeme does not do |
|---|---|
| Measure in the engines that matter for your market and language | Measure eight engines so we can name eight — that is not insight, it is the same noise eight times |
| Publish the weighting, with source and month | Give one composite score, because that hides exactly which lever is broken |
| Execute fixes within scope, with approval and rollback | Take over your ads, your social channels or your newsletter |
| Show what shifted after the retest, and what did not | Promise a position, a revenue increase or a result within a deadline |
| Deliver report, dashboard and PDF in nl, fr, en, de or es | Translate your website or take over your brand voice |
Frequently asked questions
Do you name every competitor on this page?
No. We name RankShift, Peec AI and Otterly.ai because those are the comparisons people actually make, and a comparison people make ought to be accurate. There are others. The ones we do not name, we do not name unfavourably either — putting a competitor on your own page hands them impressions under your name, and that is a gift we would rather not give.
Is ceeme more expensive than a tracking tool?
At the start, no: the scan is free, with no account and no card, and Watch Core costs €79 a month. The moment you want execution, ceeme costs more — you are buying work rather than a dashboard. On its lowest tier Otterly is cheaper than we are, and the table above says so.
Can I use ceeme alongside my current tool?
Yes, and people do. Those who already run a tracking tool tend to use ceeme for what comes after it: the exact fix, the execution and the proof. Two measurement systems side by side rarely produce the same number, and that is normal — an engine never answers twice identically.
Do you measure in more engines than they do?
That is the wrong question, so we will not answer it with a number. We measure in the engines that matter for your market and your language. Measuring an engine almost nobody in Belgium uses adds no insight; it adds a line to a report.
What if something about another tool is no longer accurate?
Email us and we will correct it. Everything stated here about RankShift, Peec AI and Otterly.ai was checked against their public websites in July 2026. This market moves fast; a price or an engine list may look different next month.
Does this also work if my customers speak French?
Yes, and it is not a translation. A French-speaking customer phrases the question differently, names different references and gets a different answer from the same engine. That is why we measure per language and per market separately, and why this site is written in each language rather than translated.
Read on
Free, no account and no card.