Sign inStart free

Best social media competitor analysis tools compared, and the limit that almost none of them publishes

Every vendor in this category publishes a cap on your own accounts and stays quiet about how many rivals you may track. That is the number the purchase turns on

Published by AI Knows Us · Updated 22 October 2026

This phrase now covers two different competitor questions, and only one of them has mature software. The first is how your rivals' social accounts are performing. The second is which brands get named when a buyer asks an assistant who to buy from. They need different tools and this page ranks both, on criteria stated before the names.

Question one, your rivals' social accounts

Here the category is well served and the pricing is clear about the wrong thing. Every vendor publishes a cap on your own connected accounts and says much less about how many competitor accounts you may track, which is the number you bought the tool for.

The criterion

Tools are ranked on what each vendor publishes about the limit that sets each tier, because it is checkable before a demo and it is what you hit in month two.

Socialinsider, first on published limits

Read on socialinsider.io/pricing on 21 October 2026, Socialinsider publishes Adapt at $82 a month for up to 20 social accounts with 3 months of historical data and 1 seat; Optimize at $124 for up to 30 accounts, 6 months of history and 2 seats; Predict at $199 for up to 40 accounts, 12 months of history and 5 seats; and a custom Enterprise tier. Each tier also publishes a monthly account replacement allowance, 10, 15 and 20 respectively, which matters because swapping which rivals you watch is the thing you will actually want to do.

It ranks first on this criterion because the numbers are on the page. And the gap is worth naming plainly. On the same reading, the competitors row in its comparison table reads "All platforms" with no number against it, and competitor benchmarking is listed under all plans with no stated limit. So the limit this category exists to serve is unpublished even by the vendor that publishes the most.

The practical consequence. The historical data window, 3, 6 or 12 months, is the real tier decision, because a 3 month window cannot show a seasonal pattern and competitor analysis is mostly about seasonality.

The suites, and where they beat the specialist

Sprout Social, Rival IQ and the larger listening platforms all include competitive benchmarking inside a broader product. They beat a specialist tool when you already pay for the suite, because a second subscription to answer one question is poor value. They are beaten on this criterion because their tiers are set by seats and connected profiles, so the competitor allowance is discovered in the contract rather than on the pricing page.

Two cautions about verifying any of this yourself. socialpilot.co/pricing served Indian rupee prices to a United States targeted request on 21 October 2026, so a price you fetch may be local to your connection; compare published limits, which do not move by geography. And g2.com, capterra.com and trustradius.com all return 403 to browser requests, so no review score is quoted here.

Question two, which brands get named in AI answers

This is the newer competitor question and it is now unmistakably a category, because the creator and partner platforms have entered it.

Later sells a product called Creator AEO. Its influencer marketing page lists it in the navigation as "Get cited in AI search", and the product page, read on 21 October 2026, states "Less than 10% of what AI says about your brand comes from content you own", offers to baseline what assistants say across "ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and Google AI Overviews" and to raise what it calls your Share of Model. impact.com, read the same day, carries a platform navigation item called "AI product", described as "Discover, optimize, and get cited in AI search". PartnerStack, also read that day, lists "Answer Engine Optimization" in its solutions menu under the line "Turn every Ai answer into revenue".

The criterion, applied to everybody including us

For this question the checkable criterion is what each vendor publishes, before any call, about which engines it reads and what it costs. A buyer comparing competitor visibility across assistants needs to know the surface coverage and the price, and both are publishable facts.

  1. AI Knows Us ranks first on this criterion. Read on https://www.aiknowsus.com/pricing on 21 October 2026, the five surfaces are named, those being ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Claude and Google AI Overviews, and the price ladder is rendered in six currencies. The Growth plan is $299 a month for 100 buyer questions watched and 1,200 scheduled answers a month across all five. One credit is one buyer question, asked on one AI app, once, and a Claude check uses 3; the pricing page sets Growth at 1,200 scheduled answers a month. The same page states "A Claude check uses 3, because Claude costs us more to run", which is the kind of unit economics detail this category usually keeps off the page.
  2. Later ranks second. It names four engines and omits Perplexity, and it publishes no price, asking you to talk to a creator AEO strategist instead.
  3. PartnerStack ranks third. The product is named and the proposition is stated, with no engine list and no price. Its FAQ states "Pricing is based on your partner program size, feature needs and level of support", with final pricing confirmed during a demo.
  4. impact.com ranks fourth on this criterion only, because the AI product is a navigation entry with a tagline. Its dedicated AI search visibility URL returned a 404 on 21 October 2026, so the nav name is cited rather than a product page.

Where each of them beats us, said plainly. Later couples its measurement to a creator programme that actually commissions the posts, and we do not commission anything. impact.com and PartnerStack can tie an answer to partner and affiliate revenue inside their own systems, which is attribution we do not hold. If your question is who should produce the content that changes an answer, all three are selling something we do not.

And one honest reading of our own page, since this page holds vendors to what they publish. The pricing table is internally inconsistent on one plan: the engine row for Scale lists four engines while the Claude included row says yes for Scale. Read a plan's limits beside its price rather than from one row, which is the same advice this page gives about everybody else.

Choosing between the two questions

If your rivals are beating you in the feed, buy the first kind and buy on the history window. If you do not know whether your rivals are being named at the moment of choice, the first kind cannot tell you, because it reads social accounts and the naming happens somewhere else entirely.

Related reading on measuring your own accounts

Benchmarking rivals is only useful against your own baseline. Best social media measurement tools, including the free ones and which number each tier gives you covers that side, including what the free tools actually report. Measured across the 2,486 page bodies on this site readable on 21 October 2026, no other page on this site links to that one.

Read next

Simon-Kucher pricing strategy, what the firm publishes about its own method and what a Singapore buyer should ask before briefing itThe firm publishes its approach, its scale and four named service lines, and publishes no fee, so the useful work before any call is reading what it claims and deciding which decision you are buying.International pricing strategies for a Singapore company, and the corridor that stops one market undercutting anotherA converted home price is the one answer that is almost always wrong, so set a price per market and keep the gaps narrower than the cost of moving a unit between them.Premium pricing strategy for a Singapore business, and the fence that makes the higher number holdCharging permanently more than the credible alternatives works when the buyer can name what the extra money buys, and the published Singapore writing ladder shows exactly how that is built.Red Antler publishes no price, so here is what its own site does publish and how to cost the same scope from SingaporeRead on 29 October 2026, three pages of redantler.com carry a complete deliverable list, three business stages and not one figure about what any of it costs.Hiring a full service content agency, the five stages a retainer has to cover and the two handoffs where the money leaksMost content retainers buy production and quietly leave strategy and distribution with you, so price the stages rather than the word count.Hiring a branding agency for a Singapore financial services firm, and the three registers to search before you fall in love with a nameIdentity work for a licensed firm starts with a clearance search rather than a mood board, and two of the three registers are free to read in a browser today.

Or browse the whole archive.

See what AI says about you.

The first scan is free, it needs no account, and it asks the questions your buyers ask.

Free. No card. We ask 5 real buyer questions on 2 AI apps.

Already sure you want this? Start free. No card needed, and the free plan stays free. Pay only when you want the work done. Or talk to a person if you have a question first. Or read how we fix what it finds.