Rankscale alternatives for a small team or for an agency: it is priced in brand dashboard slots, which is an agency unit, so a small team buys nine slots it will not use
10, 25, 50 and 100 slots across four monthly plans, with white label on the third, and the only published credit rollover in this set at up to two or three times the monthly allocation.
Published by AI Knows Us · Updated 21 October 2026
Read on 21 October 2026, Rankscale's four monthly plans are separated by a number a small team does not have: brand dashboard slots, at 10, 25, 50 and 100. A slot is a brand you monitor. One business monitoring itself needs one. So the entry plan sells a small team nine slots it will not use, and the features a small team might actually want more of, the REST API and the white label options, sit on the second and third plans instead.
For an agency the same ladder reads as a feature rather than a mismatch, because slots are exactly the unit an agency buys and extra slots are purchasable individually inside the product rather than by changing plan. That is the most granular container pricing in this set. So this is one page with two conclusions, and the dividing line is how many brands you have.
We sell a tracker and run an agency plan, so our own terms are in the table with everybody else's, including the branding line where Rankscale beats us.
The criterion: does the unit on the price card match the thing you have
One criterion: what is each vendor's entry plan actually counting, and is that the thing you have one of or many of. Read 21 October 2026, two agents each, bodies saved.
| entry plan, read 21 Oct 2026 | what the plan counts | good fit for |
|---|---|---|
| Rankscale, lowest monthly plan | brand dashboard slots, 10 of them, plus 1,200 credits and 50 page audits | an agency or a group with several brands |
| Otterly.AI Lite | search prompts, 15, with workspaces, brands, competitors, countries and seats all unlimited | one team with a short question list |
| Peec AI Starter | prompts, 50, and projects, 1, with unlimited users | one brand, one market, three assistants |
| Scrunch Core | prompts, 125, with 1 brand workspace and 5 user licences | one team of up to five in one country |
| Depra AI Starter | prompt slots, 16, and monthly checks, 1,600, with 40 markets on every plan | one brand selling across several countries |
| AI Knows Us, ours | watched buyer questions and answers read a month, with pages published a month | somebody who wants the gap fixed rather than only measured |
On that criterion Otterly.AI is first for a small team, because its entry tier counts exactly one thing and leaves everything else uncounted, which is the right shape when you do not yet know which limit you will hit. Rankscale is first for an agency, because ten slots and purchasable extras means growth does not require a plan change. Our own row is the odd one out by design: we count pages published as well as questions watched, because the product does the writing as well as the measuring, and a buyer who only wants a dashboard is better served by the five above.
The two things Rankscale publishes that nobody else here does
Both are worth knowing even if you leave. The first is credit rollover, published as a multiplier: unused credits carry into the next cycle up to twice the monthly allocation on its lower two plans and up to three times on its upper two. No other vendor in this set publishes a rollover policy at all, and for a team whose work is lumpy, a month of unused allowance surviving into a busy month is worth more than a larger monthly number.
The second is that its credit unit is defined on the page: each query of an AI engine costs a fraction of a credit, typically 0.25 per engine per prompt. That makes the ladder convertible into answers, which is why its cards can print "track up to 4,800 answers" beside 1,200 credits. Almost nobody in this category tells you what their unit converts to.
A correction about per surface pricing, which I could not verify today
A brief I was given stated that Rankscale charges 2 credits for a Claude check against 0.25 for its other surfaces. I could not find that on its pricing page today. The page publishes the typical 0.25 per engine per prompt and no per engine weighting of any kind, and the string "2 credits" is absent from the document under both agents. It may live inside the product's own credit calculator, which is behind a login. Until it can be read on a public page it is not quoted here.
What can be verified is the comparable figure from one other vendor. On ahrefs.com/brand-radar, read today at 200, the published rule is "1 check per platform, location and update" and, beside it, "Claude consumes 8 checks per update". Our own pricing page publishes its equivalent: one credit is one buyer question asked on one AI app once, most checks use one credit, and a Claude check uses 3, because Claude costs more to run.
So on the one rival in this comparison that publishes a per surface weight today, the multiplier is 8 against our 3. That is the whole of the claim that can be supported, and it is narrower than the brief that produced it. What one Claude check costs across the vendors that publish it works the same comparison at length, and that page is one of the 1,068 of ours, 53.7% of the 1,987 in our inventory, that no stored body on this site links to.
What the assistants do with Rankscale
Our standing dataset is 1,260 readings from ChatGPT and Gemini across the United States, the United Kingdom and India; 718 name at least one tracked vendor, counted once per reading in which the name appears in the answer prose. Rankscale is named in 15 of those 718, 2.1%, which is the smallest share of any vendor in this comparison. In the 5 numbered shortlists that do name it, Rankscale holds first place in 3.
| named in the same reading as Rankscale | share of the 15 Rankscale readings | share of all 718 | ratio |
|---|---|---|---|
| Otterly | 60.0% | 29.9% | 2.00 |
| Semrush, an Adobe company | 40.0% | 55.3% | 0.72 |
| Ahrefs | 33.3% | 31.1% | 1.07 |
| Peec | 26.7% | 25.2% | 1.06 |
| Profound | 20.0% | 28.3% | 0.71 |
Fifteen readings is a base where one reading moves a figure and it is published as such. The pairing with Otterly at twice its base rate is the clearest signal in it, and it is useful in one direction: if your clients have been reading about Rankscale, Otterly is the page they have most likely also seen. Three of the 15 name Rankscale in a question about an agency or clients, and none of those three produced a numbered shortlist. No reading named it in a small business or budget question. Our own name appeared in none of the 1,260.
Which alternative fits which side of the slot line
- You have one brand and you are paying for ten. Otterly Lite counts prompts only. Peec Starter counts prompts and one project. Depra Starter counts prompt slots and monthly checks and includes 40 markets.
- You have more brands than slots. Stay and buy slots. Extra brand dashboard slots are purchasable inside the app, which no other vendor in this set offers, and the next plans publish 25, 50 and 100.
- You need white label and you are on the entry plan. White label options are published on the third plan up, so inside Rankscale this is a tier. Depra publishes logo, colour and footer control on its agency tier instead, which is the other place to look.
- You need a REST API. It is on Rankscale's second of four plans, which is the joint earliest in this set alongside Otterly's second of four, and Otterly is the only one publishing a request cap beside it.
Questions about Rankscale's slots, credits and plans
How many brands can I monitor on Rankscale?
Ten on its lowest monthly plan, then 25, 50 and 100 on the three above, with extra slots purchasable in the app at any time. Its custom plan covers individual credits, single sign on, trainings, a custom API and service level guarantees.
What does a credit buy?
Its page states a fraction of a credit per engine query, typically 0.25 per engine per prompt, which is why 1,200 credits is published as up to 4,800 answers. Unused credits roll over up to twice or three times the monthly allocation depending on plan.
Which engines are on the cheapest Rankscale plan?
Its full published list, naming ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Mode, AI Overviews, Gemini, DeepSeek, Mistral, Claude and Copilot, with all regions included. That is the widest entry surface in this comparison and it is the strongest reason to buy it over anything else here.
Why are the numbers in its comparison table all zero when I check the page?
Because that table is filled in after the page loads. The real figures sit on the plan cards above it and render in the first response. Quote the cards, not the matrix, and the same caution applies to one other vendor's matrix in this set.
Is single sign on available on a Rankscale plan I can buy?
No, it is listed on its custom plan. That is true of every vendor in this comparison except two that put it on a named Enterprise tier, and ours publishes none at all, which is the honest end of that sentence.