Surmado Signal vs AI Visibility Tools: A Complete Comparison

Reading time: 29 minutes

Surmado does not sell AI placements and cannot submit your site to ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Perplexity, Meta AI, Grok, or DeepSeek. No one can. We test how these systems already talk about you and give you a plan to improve.

If you’re shopping for AI visibility tools, you’ve probably found Profound, Gumshoe, Otterly AI, or Writesonic. Here’s how Signal compares - and why real businesses choose different tools for different needs.

TLDR

Signal gives you persona-driven AI visibility testing for $50 one-time. It tests how real buyers (describing problems, not searching brands) discover you across ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Perplexity. Competitors like Gumshoe and Profound offer ongoing dashboards with monthly subscriptions starting at $99-499, but most small businesses need quarterly audits, not daily monitoring. Run Signal quarterly to find gaps, implement fixes, then re-test.

---

In This Article

• Quick Comparison Table
• The Core Positioning Difference
• Detailed Tool Comparison
  • Signal ($50 One-Time)
  • Profound ($499+/mo)
  • Gumshoe ($300+/mo)
  • Otterly AI ($29-$989/mo)
  • Writesonic ($16-79/mo)
• The Persona Realism Advantage
• The Persona-Based Showdown: Signal vs Gumshoe
• Why “Always On” Can Mean “Always Wrong”
• One-Time vs Subscription: Which Pricing Model Fits?
• What SMBs Actually Need (And What They Don’t)
• Our Vision: AI as Tool, Not Magic
• Integration with Your Existing Workflow
• Technical Capabilities Comparison
• Real Business Scenarios: Which Tool to Choose?
• Common Questions
• The Bottom Line
• Next Steps
• Quick Answers

---

Quick Comparison Table

Tool	Pricing	Best For	Key Limitation
Signal	$50 one-time	Persona-driven visibility testing, buyer journey mapping	Single-use report (not ongoing monitoring)
Gumshoe	$0.10/conversation ($10-30 per report)	Persona-based analytics, share-of-voice metrics	Dashboard analytics vs actionable report, costs scale with usage
Profound	$499+/mo subscription	Enterprise brand monitoring, comprehensive dashboards	Enterprise pricing, setup complexity, dashboard overwhelm
Otterly AI	$29-$989/mo subscription	Brand mention monitoring across AI platforms	Reactive monitoring only, no discovery insights
Writesonic	$79-$399/mo subscription	Content generation + basic ChatGPT tracking	Content tool first, visibility insights secondary

The Core Positioning Difference

Signal’s Philosophy: Real buyers don’t search for your brand name-they describe their problem. Signal simulates those organic discovery journeys.

Competitor Philosophy: Monitor brand mentions, test generic prompts, track citations.

Why This Matters

When someone asks ChatGPT “best CRM for real estate agents under $100/mo,” they don’t know your brand yet. Signal shows you if you appear in THAT answer-the one that matters for customer acquisition.

Traditional AI visibility tools (Profound, Gumshoe, Otterly) focus on tracking known brand mentions. That’s valuable for PR and reputation management. But it doesn’t tell you if AI platforms recommend you to buyers who’ve never heard of you.

KEY TAKEAWAY: Real buyers don’t search for your brand name-they describe their problem. The difference between “What do you know about [Brand]?” and “I need [solution] with [specific requirements]” is everything. Only persona-driven testing reveals if you win organic discovery moments.

Detailed Tool Comparison

Signal ($50 One-Time)

What You Get:

• 20+ persona-driven buyer research scenarios
• Multi-platform testing (ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity, Gemini)
• Citation analysis showing why you appear (or don’t)
• Actionable content gaps identified from AI responses
• Comprehensive PDF report with prioritized recommendations

Best For:

• SMBs testing AI discoverability before investing in content
• Businesses validating whether their current SEO translates to AI visibility
• Teams needing evidence-based priorities for content strategy
• One-time visibility audit to inform strategy

Limitations:

• Not ongoing monitoring (single point-in-time report)
• Can’t track daily/weekly changes in AI responses
• Requires re-purchasing for updated insights

Who Chooses Signal:

“We had no idea if ChatGPT was recommending us to buyers. Signal showed us the exact queries where we appeared-and the 12 queries where competitors won. That’s where we focused our content.” - El Tianguis (see full case study)

Profound ($499+/mo Subscription)

What You Get:

• Enterprise-grade AI visibility dashboard
• Answer engine insights across ChatGPT, Bing AI, Google SGE, Perplexity
• Agent analytics (monitoring how AI crawlers index your site)
• Competitive intelligence and sentiment tracking
• Real-time prompt search volume data
• Shopping insights for product brands
• One-click AI-optimized content generation
• Comprehensive tracking and analytics platform

Best For:

• Enterprise companies ($50M+ revenue) with strategic budget
• Large marketing teams needing comprehensive dashboards
• Organizations with dedicated AI search optimization resources
• Fortune 500 brands requiring extensive tracking infrastructure

Limitations:

• Enterprise pricing ($499+/mo Lite, custom for Enterprise - $5,988+/year)
• Lower-cost tiers only monitor ChatGPT (users could do this manually themselves)
• Requires setup, integration, and ongoing management
• Dashboard complexity requires dedicated analyst to interpret
• Aggregate metrics focus vs persona-specific insights
• Long learning curve and implementation timeline
• Feature restrictions on cheaper plans make them non-competitive with Signal’s all-in $50

When to Choose Profound Over Signal:

• You’re an enterprise with budget for comprehensive platforms
• You need daily/weekly monitoring with extensive dashboards
• You have dedicated team to manage and interpret analytics
• You’re tracking multiple brands across complex org structure
• Board demands enterprise-grade reporting infrastructure

Gumshoe ($300+/mo for Monthly Reporting)

What You Get:

• Persona-based AI visibility analytics (similar concept to Signal)
• Share-of-voice metrics across AI platforms (ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Claude)
• Persona visibility heatmaps showing which buyer types see your brand
• Topic visibility analysis (which queries trigger your brand)
• Competitive rank comparisons
• Citation source analysis
• Monthly reporting packages (typically $300+ per month for coverage across multiple buyer types)
• Usage-based option available: First 3 report runs free, then ~$0.10 per AI conversation

Best For:

• Marketing teams wanting quantitative visibility metrics
• Agencies needing dashboard-style analytics for client reporting
• Teams comfortable interpreting share-of-voice percentages
• Businesses wanting ongoing visibility tracking with monthly reports

Limitations:

• Usage-based pricing can spiral unpredictably (comprehensive testing = higher costs)
• Monthly reporting packages typically $300+/mo ($3,600+/year vs $50 one-time)
• Dashboard analytics vs actionable report format (metrics without “what to fix”)
• Requires interpretation - you get percentages, not priorities
• More setup and configuration vs Signal’s instant 15 minuteute report
• Costs scale with thorough persona/platform coverage

When to Choose Gumshoe Over Signal:

• You need monthly recurring dashboard analytics
• You want quantitative share-of-voice metrics (e.g., “you appear in 27% of AI responses”)
• You’re comfortable interpreting heatmaps and competitive rankings
• You have budget for $300+/mo ongoing monitoring
• You need to track visibility changes over time with packaged monthly reports

Otterly AI ($29-$989/mo Subscription)

What You Get:

• Comprehensive AI brand monitoring (ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, etc.)
• Sentiment analysis of brand mentions
• Competitor comparison tracking
• Share-of-voice metrics in AI responses
• Tiered plans based on monitoring frequency and features

Best For:

• Enterprises with significant brand presence
• PR and communications teams
• Companies with established market position
• Brands needing multi-tier monitoring packages

Limitations:

• Reactive monitoring (tracks mentions, not discovery opportunities)
• Assumes buyers know your brand
• No content gap analysis or action items
• Monthly subscription costs ($348-$11,868/year vs $50 one-time)
• Prompt quotas and feature limits based on tier

When to Choose Otterly Over Signal:

• You’re a recognized brand monitoring reputation over time
• You need ongoing sentiment tracking across multiple tiers
• You have budget for $29-$989/mo subscriptions
• You’re defending market share, not discovering new opportunities
• You need historical tracking with monthly reporting

Writesonic Chatsonic Booster ($16-79/mo)

What You Get:

• AI content generation tools
• Basic ChatGPT tracking feature
• SEO content optimization
• Multi-platform publishing

Best For:

• Content teams primarily focused on generation
• Businesses wanting all-in-one content + visibility tool
• Teams already using Writesonic for content creation

Limitations:

• Visibility tracking is secondary feature
• Limited persona simulation
• Content tool bundled pricing (paying for features you may not need)
• Less robust visibility insights than purpose-built tools

When to Choose Writesonic Over Signal:

• You need content generation + basic visibility tracking
• You’re already in the Writesonic ecosystem
• You want one subscription for multiple content needs

The Persona Realism Advantage

Here’s the key difference that matters for business results:

Generic Prompt Testing (Profound, Gumshoe):

• “What are the best CRM tools?”
• “Who offers marketing automation?”
• “Best SEO tools for small business”

Persona-Driven Research Simulation (Signal):

• “I’m a real estate agent in Austin spending 3+ hours/day on manual follow-ups. I need a CRM under $100/mo that integrates with Zillow and automates text follow-ups for new leads. What are my options?”
• “I run a 15-person marketing agency. Our clients keep asking for AI-generated content, but I’m worried about quality and SEO penalties. What’s the safest way to add AI content services without risking client rankings?”
• “I’m opening my third gym location and drowning in spreadsheets tracking member check-ins, billing, and class schedules across locations. What gym management software can unify this under $200/mo with mobile check-in?”

Why Persona Prompts Win:

1. Context matters: AI platforms give different answers for “best CRM” vs “best CRM for real estate agents under $100/mo”
2. Intent signals: Detailed scenarios signal buying intent-AI responds with solutions, not definitions
3. Competitive reality: Your real competitors appear in persona answers, not brand name searches
4. Actionable insights: You learn which specific use cases AI recommends you for (and which you’re missing)

KEY TAKEAWAY: Generic prompts like “best CRM tools” give generic answers. Detailed persona scenarios like “I’m a real estate agent in Austin spending 3+ hours/day on manual follow-ups, need CRM under $100/mo that integrates with Zillow” trigger buying-intent responses. Context-rich queries reveal your real competitive position-and specific content gaps to fix.

The Persona-Based Showdown: Signal vs Gumshoe

In the AI visibility market, only two tools are truly persona-based: Signal and Gumshoe. Everyone else (Profound, Otterly, Writesonic) focuses on brand monitoring or generic prompts. This makes the Signal vs Gumshoe decision the most important one for businesses that understand the power of persona-driven testing.

The Core Difference

Both Signal and Gumshoe understand that “best CRM” searches are worthless-real buyers ask detailed, context-rich questions. But they approach persona testing completely differently:

Signal’s Approach: Value mode - Custom ebook about YOUR brand

• $50 flat fee, all-inclusive
• Deliberately asynchronous: “We’ll get back to you in 15 minutes” (not instant)
• This 15 minuteute window lets us cut the BS and do thorough multi-turn persona conversations
• Quality over speed: We validate results before delivery (instant results can sacrifice accuracy)
• What you get: A custom-written ebook deep dive into your brand, where you stand in AI platforms, and exactly what to do about it
• Delivered as comprehensive PDF report (not a generic dashboard you have to interpret)
• Zero setup, zero ongoing commitment, just results you can read and act on

Gumshoe’s Approach: Slick mode - Instant dashboards

• Synchronous fancy React app with immediate visibility
• Usage-based pricing that can spiral ($300+/mo typical for monthly reporting)
• You get: Share-of-voice percentages, visibility heatmaps, competitive metrics (instantly)
• Instant gratification, but speed can come at the cost of accuracy in complex persona scenarios
• Requires dashboard interpretation-you see the data, you figure out the action
• Beautiful interface, but you’re paying for the slickness and ongoing access

When Each Wins

Choose Signal when you need to answer: “Should I invest in AI visibility?” or “What content gaps are costing me customers?”

• You’re testing AI visibility for the first time
• You need evidence to justify content budget to leadership
• You want concrete action items, not analytics dashboards
• You’re an SMB/agency that values predictable one-time costs
• You operate project-by-project (bill Signal to client as line item)

Choose Gumshoe when you need to answer: “How is our AI visibility trending month-over-month?” or “What’s our share-of-voice vs competitors?”

• You need ongoing monitoring dashboards for monthly reporting
• You’re comfortable with usage-based pricing (knowing it can spiral)
• You have analytics expertise to interpret heatmaps and percentages
• You want quantitative metrics (27% share-of-voice) over qualitative insights (“stressed moms don’t see you”)
• You’re tracking multiple clients and need dashboard flexibility

The Hybrid Strategy Many Use

Smart teams don’t choose one forever-they use both strategically:

1. Start with Signal ($50) to identify major persona gaps and content priorities
2. Implement fixes based on Signal’s recommendations (3-6 months)
3. Re-test with Signal ($50) to validate improvements
4. Add Gumshoe for ongoing monitoring only if you need monthly tracking after fixes are live

Total cost: $100 for two Signal audits vs $3,600/year for Gumshoe monthly monitoring. Most SMBs find quarterly Signal reports deliver more value than daily dashboard analytics.

KEY TAKEAWAY: You don’t need to choose one tool forever. Start with Signal’s $50 audit to identify gaps, implement fixes over 3-6 months, then re-test with Signal ($50) to measure impact. Only add ongoing monitoring if you need it-most SMBs don’t. Total cost: $100 for two audit covering performance, accessibility, SEO, security, and mobiles vs $3,600+/year for continuous dashboards.

The Bottom Line

If you’re asking “Does AI recommend me to my target customers?” → Signal answers that in 15 minutes for $50

If you’re asking “How did our AI share-of-voice change this month?” → Gumshoe provides those metrics (at $300+/mo)

Most bootstrapping SMBs and 10-person agencies need the first question answered. Established brands with marketing budgets need the second.

Why “Always On” Can Mean “Always Wrong”

The monitoring trap: Real-time dashboards feel productive. You see live updates, percentage changes, instant alerts when your visibility shifts. But in AI visibility, “always on” often means “always reacting to noise instead of signal.”

The Statistical Reality of AI Platform Responses

AI platforms don’t give consistent answers-by design.

Run the same persona prompt 10 times in ChatGPT, you’ll get 10 slightly different responses. This isn’t a bug, it’s a feature. Language models use probabilistic sampling: temperature settings, top-p sampling, and randomness ensure diverse outputs.

What this means for monitoring:

Monday 9am:   Your brand mentioned in 3/10 responses (30%)
Monday 11am:  Your brand mentioned in 5/10 responses (50%)
Monday 2pm:   Your brand mentioned in 2/10 responses (20%)

Did your visibility change 3 times in one day? No. Statistical variance happened.

Real visibility changes occur over weeks, not hours:

• AI platforms update training data weekly/monthly (not continuously)
• Citation source rankings shift as new content gets indexed
• Your competitors publish content that changes the landscape
• Algorithm updates roll out gradually across servers

The shallow monitoring problem:

Always-on tools run 1-3 test queries per persona, surface instant “visibility score,” trigger alerts on shifts

What you miss:

• Was the shift real or statistical noise?
• Which specific content gap caused the change?
• What citation sources shifted (and why)?
• What should you actually DO about it?

KEY INSIGHT: A 15% visibility drop on Tuesday doesn’t mean you should panic-publish content on Wednesday. It might mean ChatGPT’s random sampling favored a competitor’s cached response. Real strategic shifts require aggregate data over time-preferably immutable snapshots you can compare quarterly.

Aggregate Data Reveals Truth, Real-Time Alerts Reveal Noise

How Signal approaches this:

20+ persona scenarios (not 1-3 generic prompts)

• Tests each persona across 7+ AI platforms
• Analyzes 140+ total AI responses per report
• Aggregates patterns across platforms (ChatGPT vs Claude vs Perplexity)
• Delivers immutable snapshot you can compare quarter-over-quarter

Why immutability matters:

Always-on dashboards:

• Monday: “Your visibility is 42%”
• Tuesday: “Your visibility is 38%” (was it 42% yesterday or 41%? Dashboard overwrote it)
• Wednesday: “Your visibility is 45%”
• Question: Did you improve or is this noise? No historical record to compare.

Signal’s immutable reports:

• Q1 2024: PDF shows 28% presence rate, 54 authority score
• Q2 2024: PDF shows 35% presence rate, 61 authority score
• Conclusion: Real improvement. You can open both PDFs, see exact citation differences, know what worked.

You can’t revise history when reports are immutable. Dashboards update and overwrite. PDFs don’t lie.

Deep Research Takes Time (But Not Much Time)

The 15 minuteute paradox:

Signal reports take about 15 minutes to generate, yet deliver deeper insights than instant dashboards. How?

Instant dashboards (0-5 seconds):

1. Run 3 generic prompts
2. Count brand mentions
3. Calculate percentage
4. Display number on dashboard

What you get: Fast number. No context.

Signal’s 15 minuteute deep dive:

1. Run 20+ persona-specific scenarios (2 min)
2. Test across 7 AI platforms in parallel (3 min)
3. Analyze 140+ responses for citation patterns (4 min)
4. Compare to 50K+ competitive intelligence database (2 min)
5. Generate custom strategic recommendations (3 min)
6. Compile immutable PDF ebook (1 min)

What you get: Actionable report explaining WHY you appear (or don’t), WHICH content gaps matter most, WHAT to do next.

The research depth tradeoff:

Metric	Instant Dashboard	Signal 15 minute Report
Speed	0-5 seconds	about 15 minutes
Persona scenarios	1-3 generic	20+ detailed
AI platforms tested	1-4	7+
Total responses analyzed	3-12	140+
Citation analysis	Brand mentions only	Source attribution + competitive context
Strategic recommendations	None (just metrics)	3-5 prioritized actions
Format	Ephemeral dashboard	Immutable PDF report

KEY TAKEAWAY: Shallow answers come fast. Deep analysis takes time-but 15 minutes isn’t much time for research that typically requires hours of manual testing. Signal automates the deep dive so you get research-grade insights at dashboard speed.

When Weekly Beats Momentary

AI visibility operates on a weekly cadence-by design:

How AI platforms update:

• ChatGPT: Indexes new content weekly (not real-time)
• Claude: Citation sources refresh on rolling basis (days, not hours)
• Perplexity: Real-time web search, but ranking algorithms update weekly
• Gemini: Training data updates monthly

Your content doesn’t instantly appear in AI recommendations. It gets indexed, evaluated for authority, compared to competitors, then surfaces in responses-over days/weeks.

What this means for monitoring frequency:

Daily monitoring: Catches noise (random sampling variance, A/B tests, caching differences)

Weekly monitoring: Catches signal (real citation changes, new competitor content, algorithm shifts)

Quarterly audits: Catches strategic shifts (your content roadmap impact, seasonal trends, market repositioning)

The right cadence for most businesses:

• Quarterly Signal audits ($50 × 4 = $200/year): Validate strategy, measure content impact, identify new gaps
• Monthly check-ins (optional): If you’re publishing AI-focused content weekly
• Daily dashboards (rarely needed): If you’re a large brand with dedicated AI visibility team

Example: SaaS company publishing 2 blog posts/month:

Q1: Run Signal ($50) → Identify 5 content gaps
    Months 1-3: Publish 6 blog posts addressing gaps

Q2: Run Signal ($50) → Measure impact of Q1 content
    Result: Presence rate 12% → 28% ✓
    Months 4-6: Double down on what worked

Q3: Run Signal ($50) → Identify new competitor threats
    Months 7-9: Defensive content to protect position

Q4: Run Signal ($50) → Year-over-year comparison
    Result: Presence rate 28% → 42%, Authority 67 → 78

Total cost: $200/year Total time investment: 60 minutes (4 × 15 minute reports) Result: 30% → 42% presence rate improvement with clear attribution to specific content

Daily dashboard alternative:

Cost: $499-999/month = $5,988-11,988/year
Time investment: 15 min/day reviewing dashboards = 91 hours/year
Result: You see daily fluctuations but struggle to connect actions to outcomes

KEY INSIGHT: AI visibility doesn’t change fast enough to justify daily monitoring for most businesses. Your content takes weeks to index, your competitors publish monthly, algorithms update quarterly. Weekly cadence captures real shifts. Quarterly audits validate strategy. Daily dashboards mostly capture noise-unless you’re publishing content daily and need to track immediate impact.

Immutable Beats Ephemeral for Strategic Decisions

The dashboard revision problem:

Scenario: You’re deciding whether to invest $10K in AI visibility optimization.

With always-on dashboard:

• November 2024: Dashboard shows 35% visibility
• May 2025: Dashboard shows 42% visibility
• Question: Did you improve 7 points? Or did the vendor change how they calculate “visibility”?

No way to verify. Dashboard methodology can change. Metrics get redefined. You can’t audit historical data.

With immutable Signal reports:

• November 2024: PDF shows 28% presence rate, lists exactly which platforms, which personas, which citations
• May 2025: PDF shows 35% presence rate, same methodology, directly comparable
• Proof: You can open both PDFs side-by-side, see exact response differences, validate improvement

Immutability = accountability.

Why this matters for agencies:

Client conversation with dashboards:

Client: “You said we were at 40% last quarter. Now we’re at 38%. Did we go backwards?” Agency: “No, the vendor updated their algorithm. You actually improved, but the score looks lower.” Client: “How do I know that’s true?”

Client conversation with immutable reports:

Client: “Q4 report showed we appeared in 3/20 ChatGPT scenarios. Q1 report shows 7/20. That’s real improvement.” Agency: “Exactly. Here are the 4 new scenarios where you’re now recommended. Here’s the content we published that triggered it.” Client: “I can literally see the difference in the PDFs. Let’s keep going.”

Proof beats promises.

The Bottom Line: Choose Depth Over Speed

Always-on monitoring sounds appealing:

• Instant feedback
• Real-time dashboards
• Daily alerts
• Continuous tracking

But in AI visibility, speed creates problems:

• Statistical noise masquerading as signal
• Shallow metrics without strategic context
• Ephemeral data you can’t audit
• Analysis paralysis from constant fluctuations

Aggregate, deep-dive analysis delivers:

• Statistically significant patterns (140+ responses per report)
• Strategic recommendations (not just numbers)
• Immutable records (quarterly comparisons that prove impact)
• Actionable priorities (3-5 specific content gaps to fix)

Signal’s design philosophy:

15 minutes of deliberate research beats 24/7 shallow monitoring. AI visibility changes weekly, not momentarily. Give data time to aggregate. Deliver insights, not just metrics. Make reports immutable so you can prove progress.

Next time a vendor pitches “real-time AI visibility monitoring,” ask:

1. How many responses do you analyze per report? (Signal: 140+)
2. Are reports immutable or does the dashboard overwrite history?
3. What’s the statistical confidence interval on a 5% visibility shift?
4. Do I get strategic recommendations or just percentages?

If they can’t answer those questions, you’re paying for speed you don’t need-at the cost of depth you do.

Quick Decision Guide: Which Monitoring Cadence?

Your Situation	Recommended Approach	Why	Annual Cost
New to AI visibility	Quarterly Signal audits	Validate strategy, measure content impact	$200/year (4 reports)
Publishing 2-4 posts/month	Quarterly Signal audits	Content takes weeks to index - quarterly cadence captures real changes	$200/year
Publishing daily AI content	Monthly Signal checks	Higher publication frequency justifies more frequent testing	$600/year (12 reports)
Agency managing 5+ clients	Signal per client quarterly + optional Gumshoe for high-value clients	Most clients need quarterly insights, reserve monitoring for those who pay for it	$1,000-3,600/year
Enterprise brand (>$50M revenue)	Daily monitoring dashboard	Dedicated AI visibility team justifies real-time tracking	$6,000-12,000/year

Bottom line for most SMBs: Quarterly Signal audits ($50 × 4 = $200/year) deliver better ROI than daily dashboards ($6K-12K/year). AI visibility changes weekly, not daily. Optimize for depth, not speed.

Ready to start? Run your first Signal report ($50) to get baseline AI visibility across ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity, and Gemini. Then use the quarterly workflow above to track progress.

One-Time vs Subscription: Which Pricing Model Fits?

Choose One-Time (Signal) If:

• You’re testing AI visibility for the first time
• You need evidence to justify content investment
• Your business changes slowly (not daily AI monitoring needed)
• You want actionable priorities without ongoing costs
• You’re an SMB with limited budget for tools
• You’ll re-test quarterly or annually as strategy evolves

Choose Subscription (Profound, Gumshoe, Otterly) If:

• You need daily/weekly monitoring of brand mentions
• You’re tracking competitor positioning changes over time
• You have enterprise budget for ongoing tools
• Your brand has high visibility requiring reputation management
• You’re an agency managing multiple clients
• You need historical trend data over months

The Hybrid Approach Many Teams Use:

1. Start with Signal ($50) to identify content gaps and visibility baseline
2. Implement recommended content improvements from Signal report
3. Re-test with Signal ($50) after 90 days to measure impact
4. Upgrade to subscription monitoring only if you need ongoing tracking

Total cost for two comprehensive visibility audits: $100 over 90 days, vs $297+ for three months of Profound/Otterly subscriptions.

What SMBs Actually Need (And What They Don’t)

After working with 1,000+ small businesses on AI visibility, here’s what we’ve learned:

Most SMBs Don’t Need:

• Daily monitoring: Your AI visibility doesn’t change that fast unless you’re publishing content daily
• Competitor tracking: You already know your competitors; you need to know why AI chooses them over you
• Brand mention alerts: If buyers don’t know your brand yet, mentions don’t help discovery
• Historical trend data: You need current visibility + action items, not 6 months of graphs

Most SMBs DO Need:

• Persona-driven discovery testing: Do AI platforms recommend you to buyers describing their problem?
• Content gap identification: What information do AI platforms want that you’re not providing?
• Citation analysis: What sources do AI platforms trust in your category?
• Actionable priorities: Which 3-5 content pieces will have the biggest visibility impact?

Signal delivers what SMBs need. Subscription tools deliver what enterprises need.

KEY TAKEAWAY: Most SMBs don’t need daily monitoring or historical trend data. Your AI visibility doesn’t change fast unless you’re publishing daily. What you DO need: persona-driven discovery testing, content gap identification, and actionable priorities. Test quarterly, implement between tests, measure impact.

Our Vision: AI as Tool, Not Magic

The AI hype cycle is exhausting. Every vendor promises AGI is around the corner, that AI will solve everything, that you need to “embrace the AI revolution” or get left behind.

Here’s our take: AI is a tool. A really good tool. But still just a tool.

AI is Flawed (And That’s Fine)

AI hallucinates. It makes up citations, invents statistics, confidently states falsehoods. It’s probabilistic, not deterministic. Run the same prompt twice, get different answers. Ask for a count, it approximates instead of calculating.

Traditional code doesn’t hallucinate. If you tell an algorithm “count these items,” it counts exactly. If you ask for a percentage, it does the math correctly every time.

Surmado’s approach: Use both.

What we use AI for:

• Natural language understanding (parsing user intent from research scenarios)
• Pattern recognition (analyzing 140+ AI responses for competitive themes)
• Content synthesis (drafting strategic recommendations from aggregated data)
• Semantic similarity (matching your business to relevant personas)

What we use traditional algorithms for:

• Counting (presence rate: you appeared in 7/20 scenarios = 35%)
• Math (authority score: weighted average of confidence levels)
• Data validation (ensuring citation URLs actually exist)
• Consistency (same input = same output, every time)

Example from Signal reports:

AI’s job:

“Analyze these 20 ChatGPT responses. What patterns emerge? Which competitors appear most often? What content gaps exist?”

Algorithm’s job:

“Count exact brand mentions. Calculate presence rate: 7 mentions ÷ 20 scenarios = 35.0%. Rank competitors by frequency: [Brand A: 12, Brand B: 8, You: 7].”

Why this matters: You get the insight of AI (pattern recognition, strategic recommendations) without the flaws (hallucinated stats, inconsistent counts, made-up percentages).

KEY INSIGHT: AI is incredible at understanding context and recognizing patterns. It’s terrible at counting and arithmetic. Traditional code is incredible at math and consistency. It’s terrible at understanding nuance. We use both. AI for intelligence, code for accuracy. No compromises.

The Forklift Metaphor

A forklift can lift 5,000 pounds. Humans can lift maybe 200 pounds. The forklift is objectively more powerful.

But a forklift without an operator is useless. It can’t decide which pallet to move, when to move it, or where it goes. It needs human judgment.

A bad forklift operator is dangerous. They’ll drop pallets, damage inventory, hurt people. The tool’s power amplifies both good decisions and bad ones.

AI is the same.

AI (the forklift):

• Powerful language understanding
• Can analyze thousands of responses in seconds
• Never gets tired, works 24/7
• Scales infinitely (same effort for 1 report or 1,000)

The operator (Surmado’s expertise):

• Knows which prompts actually test buyer intent (vs vanity metrics)
• Understands which AI responses indicate real visibility (vs noise)
• Designs persona scenarios that match your actual customers
• Interprets patterns and translates them to business strategy

Bad AI operators create bad outcomes:

• Generic prompts that test brand awareness instead of discovery
• Hallucinated statistics presented as fact
• Real-time monitoring that surfaces noise instead of signal
• Dashboard metrics with no strategic recommendations

Our goal: Be the expert operator, so you don’t have to be.

We Don’t Believe in AGI Hype

The AI industry wants you to believe:

• AGI (Artificial General Intelligence) is 2-5 years away
• AI will replace entire job categories
• You need to “AI-ify” your business or become irrelevant
• Every problem needs an AI solution

We believe:

• AI is a powerful pattern-matching tool, not a sentient intelligence
• AI augments humans, doesn’t replace judgment
• Most businesses need practical AI applications, not theoretical futures
• Some problems are better solved with spreadsheets and algorithms

Surmado’s mission: Help small businesses navigate AI’s impact on discoverability today-not speculate about AGI futures that may never arrive.

What this means in practice:

We won’t:

• Promise AI will “revolutionize” your business
• Hype AGI timelines or capabilities
• Sell you AI tools you don’t need
• Use AI buzzwords to sound impressive

We will:

• Tell you exactly what AI can and can’t do for visibility
• Use AI where it helps, traditional code where it works better
• Give you actionable recommendations (not philosophical musings)
• Admit when a problem doesn’t need AI to solve

KEY TAKEAWAY: AGI hype sells subscriptions and venture capital. Practical AI tools solve real problems. Surmado focuses on the latter. We use AI to test if ChatGPT/Claude/Perplexity recommend you to buyers. That’s valuable today. We’re not interested in predicting AI’s role in 2030-we’re helping you get found in 2025.

Let Surmado Be Your AI Expert

You have enough to worry about.

Running a business means:

• Managing cash flow
• Hiring and retaining talent
• Serving customers
• Dealing with suppliers
• Marketing, sales, operations, strategy

You shouldn’t also need to become an AI expert to understand if ChatGPT recommends you to potential customers.

That’s where Surmado comes in.

What we handle (the complex stuff):

Area	What Surmado Does	Why It Matters
AI Platform Expertise	Tracks ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity, Gemini updates + citation algorithms	Platforms change weekly - we monitor so you don’t have to
Prompt Engineering	Designs persona scenarios matching real buyer intent	Generic prompts = generic insights. Context-rich queries reveal actual competitive position
Data Interpretation	Distinguishes signal from noise (real shifts vs statistical variance)	Most “visibility drops” are random sampling - we identify actual changes
Technical Implementation	Hybrid AI + algorithms, Intelligence Tokens, immutable PDFs	You get pattern insights (AI) + exact stats (algorithms) without hallucinations

Your simple workflow (the easy stuff):

Step	Time	What You Do
1. Order	2 min	Run Signal report ($50) for baseline AI visibility
2. Read	15 min	Review custom ebook with your competitive positioning
3. Implement	3-6 months	Fix 3-5 prioritized content gaps (or delegate to team)
4. Re-test	2 min	Order Signal again to measure impact

What you DON’T need to do:

• Learn AI search optimization or ChatGPT SEO techniques
• Study LLM citation algorithms or training data mechanics
• Analyze 140+ AI responses manually across 7 platforms
• Build citation tracking infrastructure or conversational AI discovery tools
• Interpret statistical variance in language model outputs
• Become an AI visibility expert

This is the forklift operator model. You tell us what you’re trying to lift (business goals, target customers, competitive positioning). We operate the AI forklift to test your visibility, analyze the results, and recommend the optimal path.

Ready to see how AI platforms see your business? Run Signal ($50) to get your baseline AI visibility report. Then follow the workflow above to improve systematically.

No BS, Just Results

Our promise:

1. Honesty about AI limitations

• We’ll tell you when AI visibility doesn’t matter for your business model
• We’ll admit when competitors have better positioning
• We’ll recommend non-AI fixes (traditional SEO, GBP optimization, schema markup) when those work better

2. Practical tools, not hype

• Signal tests real buyer discovery (not vanity metrics)
• Solutions recommends phased strategies with exit triggers (not pie-in-the-sky ROI)
• Scan identifies technical gaps (not theoretical “AI readiness scores”)

3. Flat fees, no subscriptions

• $50 Signal report, no auto-renewal
• $50 Solutions analysis, pay once
• $50 Scan audit, done
• No “enterprise tier” paywalls for basic features

4. Actionable recommendations

• “Add FAQ schema to these 3 pages” (not “improve content quality”)
• “Publish case study addressing [specific persona pain point]” (not “be more visible”)
• “Your GBP lacks services list-add these 12 specific services” (not “optimize your profile”)

What Surmado is NOT:

• An AI consulting firm charging $15K for strategy decks
• A subscription dashboard you check once and forget
• A hype machine promising AGI will change everything
• A tool that requires you to become an AI expert

What Surmado IS:

• Your AI visibility expert, so you don’t have to be
• Practical tools that answer specific questions ($50, 15 minutes)
• Hybrid AI + algorithms (intelligence where it helps, accuracy where it matters)
• No BS, just: “Here’s your visibility. Here’s why. Here’s what to fix.”

The Bottom Line

AI is an important technology. It’s changing how buyers discover businesses. ChatGPT, Claude, and Perplexity are answering buyer questions that used to go to Google. If you’re not recommended in those answers, you’re losing customers.

AI is also flawed. It hallucinates, it’s probabilistic, it’s inconsistent. Using AI alone creates garbage outputs. Using traditional code alone misses insights.

Surmado uses both. AI for pattern recognition and natural language understanding. Algorithms for counting, math, and consistency. Hybrid architecture that gets the best of both.

Our vision isn’t AGI utopia. It’s practical AI tools wielded by expert operators on behalf of small businesses who have better things to do than become AI researchers.

You run your business. We’ll handle AI visibility. No hype, no BS, no subscriptions you don’t need. Just clear answers to simple questions:

• Does ChatGPT recommend me to buyers? (Signal, $50)
• What strategic options do I have? (Solutions, $50)
• Is my website technically ready for AI? (Scan, $50)

That’s it. AI as a tool, not magic. Surmado as your operator, not another vendor promising the moon.

How They Work Together (Recommended Workflow)

Most businesses get the best results by combining tools strategically:

1. Start with Signal ($50) - Diagnose your current AI visibility

• Get baseline Presence Rate and Authority Score
• Identify which AI platforms mention you (and which don’t)
• Receive your Intelligence Token for strategic planning

2. Feed Signal data into Solutions ($50) - Build phased action plan

• Solutions analyzes your Intelligence Token data
• Creates real-options strategy (not one-size-fits-all)
• Recommends phased approach: pilot → scale → optimize
• Includes exit triggers (when to abandon vs pivot)

3. Optional: Add Scan ($50) - Ensure technical readiness

• Before implementing Solutions roadmap, verify site is AI-ready
• Check schema markup, WCAG compliance, mobile optimization
• Fix technical blockers that would sabotage content efforts

Total investment: $100-150 (vs $6K-12K/year for monitoring dashboards)

See the complete Signal + Solutions workflow → for step-by-step guidance on using your Intelligence Token to build a strategic AI visibility plan.

Integration with Your Existing Workflow

If You Use SEO Tools (Semrush, Ahrefs, etc.):

• Signal complements: SEO tools show what ranks on Google; Signal shows what AI platforms recommend
• Workflow: Run Signal report → Identify AI content gaps → Use SEO tools to optimize those pages for both search and AI
• Data sync: Export Signal findings into your SEO workflow as content priorities

If You Use Content Management (WordPress, HubSpot, etc.):

• Signal identifies: What content to create based on AI platform gaps
• Your CMS executes: Content creation, publishing, optimization
• Re-test: Run Signal again after publishing to measure AI visibility impact

If You Use Analytics (Google Analytics, etc.):

• Signal shows: Which buyer queries AI platforms answer without mentioning you
• Analytics shows: Traffic and conversions from visitors who do find you
• Gap analysis: The difference reveals opportunity cost of poor AI visibility

Technical Capabilities Comparison

Feature	Signal	Profound	Gumshoe	Otterly	Writesonic
Persona-driven prompts	Yes - 20+ built-in	No - Generic	Partial - Manual	No - Brand-focused	Partial - Limited
Multi-platform testing	Yes - 4 platforms	Yes - Multiple	Yes - Multiple	Yes - Multiple	Partial - ChatGPT focus
Citation analysis	Yes - Deep analysis	Yes - Basic	Yes	Yes	Partial - Limited
Content gap identification	Yes - Actionable list	Partial - Manual	Partial - Manual	No - Not included	Partial - Limited
Buyer journey mapping	Yes - Core feature	No - Not included	No - Not included	No - Not included	No - Not included
Ongoing monitoring	No - One-time	Yes - Daily/weekly	Yes - On-demand	Yes - Daily	Partial - Basic
Historical trends	No - Single report	Yes - Full history	Yes	Yes	Partial - Limited
Competitor tracking	Partial - In responses	Yes - Dedicated	Partial - Manual	Yes - Dedicated	No - Not included
API access	No - Report only	Yes - Available	Partial - Limited	Yes - Available	Yes - Available
Team collaboration	Partial - Share report	Yes - Multi-user	Yes - Multi-user	Yes - Multi-user	Yes - Multi-user

Real Business Scenarios: Which Tool to Choose?

Scenario 1: “We Have No Idea If AI Recommends Us”

Your Situation: You’re an established business with good Google SEO, but you’ve never tested AI platform visibility.

Best Tool: Signal ($50)

• Get comprehensive baseline visibility across 20+ buyer scenarios
• Identify content gaps without ongoing subscription commitment
• Use report insights to inform content strategy
• Re-test in 90 days after implementing recommendations

Scenario 2: “We’re Launching a New Product”

Your Situation: You’re introducing a new offering and want to ensure AI platforms discover it.

Best Tool: Signal ($50) → Gumshoe ($50/mo) for 3 months

• Start with Signal to identify category positioning and content needs
• Use Gumshoe for ongoing testing as you publish launch content
• Cancel Gumshoe after product launch stabilizes
• Re-test with Signal at 6-month mark

Scenario 3: “Competitors Are Beating Us in AI Responses”

Your Situation: You keep seeing competitor recommendations in ChatGPT/Perplexity where you should appear.

Best Tool: Signal ($50) + competitive analysis

• Signal’s persona testing reveals exactly which scenarios competitors win
• Citation analysis shows what sources AI trusts about competitors
• Content gap identification prioritizes what to publish to compete
• Much cheaper than guessing what content to create

Scenario 4: “We Need Ongoing Brand Monitoring”

Your Situation: You’re an established brand that needs to track reputation and mentions across AI platforms daily.

Best Tool: Profound ($99/mo) or Otterly AI ($99+/mo)

• Daily monitoring appropriate for established brands
• Competitor tracking and sentiment analysis
• Historical trend data for reporting to leadership
• Not right for discovery-you’re already known

Scenario 5: “We’re an Agency Managing Multiple Clients”

Your Situation: You need flexible testing for different client industries and scenarios.

Best Tool: Gumshoe ($50/mo) or Signal per client

• Gumshoe gives ongoing flexibility to write custom prompts per client
• Alternatively: Purchase Signal report per client ($50 each) for audit covering performance, accessibility, SEO, security, and mobiles
• Cost consideration: 10 clients × Signal ($500 total) vs 10 months × Gumshoe ($500)

Common Questions

”Can I Use Signal AND a Subscription Tool?”

Absolutely. Many businesses use Signal for quarterly audit covering performance, accessibility, SEO, security, and mobiles and pair it with ongoing monitoring tools for daily tracking. This hybrid approach gives you:

• Deep persona-driven insights from Signal (quarterly)
• Daily brand mention monitoring from Profound/Otterly
• Cost efficiency: $200/year Signal + $600/year Gumshoe = $800 vs $1,188+ for Profound/Otterly alone

”Does Signal Track Changes Over Time?”

No. Signal provides a point-in-time comprehensive report. For ongoing tracking, you’d re-purchase Signal quarterly or use subscription tools like Profound, Gumshoe, or Otterly for continuous monitoring.

”Which Tool Integrates with My Existing Stack?”

• Signal: PDF report export (integrate manually into any workflow)
• Profound: API available for custom integrations
• Gumshoe: CSV exports, limited API
• Otterly: API available, Slack integrations
• Writesonic: Native integrations with content platforms

”Do I Need Technical Skills to Use These Tools?”

• Signal: No. Report delivered as readable PDF with clear action items
• Profound: Minimal. Dashboard interface, no coding required
• Gumshoe: Moderate. Best results require SEO knowledge to write effective prompts
• Otterly: Minimal. Dashboard-based monitoring
• Writesonic: Minimal. Content tool interface

The Bottom Line: Choose Based on Your Actual Needs

Choose Signal ($50 one-time) if:

• You’re testing AI visibility for the first time
• You need persona-driven buyer journey insights
• You want actionable content priorities without subscription commitment
• You’re an SMB with budget constraints
• You’ll implement changes and re-test quarterly

Choose Profound ($99/mo) if:

• You need daily brand mention monitoring
• You’re an established brand tracking reputation
• You have enterprise budget for ongoing tools
• Historical trend data is valuable for reporting

Choose Gumshoe ($50/mo) if:

• You have SEO expertise to write custom prompts
• You need testing flexibility for multiple scenarios
• You’re an agency managing diverse clients
• You want ongoing testing without Signal’s per-report cost

Choose Otterly AI ($99+/mo) if:

• You’re a recognized brand monitoring competitive positioning
• You need premium sentiment analysis features
• You have dedicated budget for comprehensive monitoring
• Share-of-voice metrics matter for your reporting

Choose Writesonic ($16-79/mo) if:

• You primarily need content generation tools
• You want all-in-one content + basic visibility
• You’re already in the Writesonic ecosystem

Next Steps

If You’re Starting Your AI Visibility Journey:

1. Get Signal Report ($50) to establish baseline and identify gaps
2. Review the persona-driven scenarios where you appear (and don’t)
3. Implement top 3-5 content recommendations from report
4. Re-test with Signal in 90 days to measure impact
5. Upgrade to subscription monitoring only if ongoing tracking becomes necessary

If You’re Already Monitoring with Subscription Tools:

1. Run Signal once to get persona-driven insights your current tool may miss
2. Compare generic prompt results (current tool) vs buyer journey simulation (Signal)
3. Use Signal findings to write better custom prompts in Gumshoe or Profound
4. Consider hybrid approach: Keep daily monitoring, add quarterly Signal audits for strategic insights

Learn More About AI Visibility:

• How AI Platforms Discover Businesses
• AI Visibility vs Traditional SEO
• Understanding Your Signal Report
• Signal + Solutions Workflow
• Case Study: El Tianguis

---

Still Not Sure Which Tool Fits? Contact us with your specific scenario. We’ll give you an honest recommendation-even if that means suggesting a competitor tool better suited to your needs. Our goal is helping businesses get found by AI, regardless of which tool gets you there.

---

Quick Answers

Signal vs Gumshoe in 100 words?

Signal ($50 one-time): Persona-based testing with 15 minute deliberate analysis. You get custom ebook about YOUR brand, prioritized recommendations, 3-5 buyer personas tested across 7 platforms. Quality over speed.

Gumshoe ($0.10/conversation, typically $300+/mo): Instant synchronous React app with slick dashboards. Usage-based pricing can spiral. Fast visibility metrics, but speed can sacrifice accuracy (e.g., Charlotte Hornets for LA personas).

Key difference: Signal = deep quarterly audits. Gumshoe = ongoing monitoring. Signal has API roadmap (2025), Gumshoe doesn’t.

---

Why is Signal cheaper than Profound?

Profound: $499-999/month subscription with enterprise features, daily monitoring, team dashboards

Signal: $50 one-time with no subscription, no auto-renewal, no feature paywalls

Why Signal is cheaper:

• No subscription overhead: You’re not paying for 30 days of monitoring when you only need quarterly checks
• Automation: AI-powered analysis (not human analysts charging consulting rates)
• Anti-subscription philosophy: We believe you shouldn’t pay for tools when you’re not using them

When Profound makes sense: Need daily monitoring, enterprise team features, continuous dashboards

Learn more about flat-fee philosophy →

---

Do I need Signal if I have Semrush?

Yes-they’re complementary, not competitors.

Semrush: Traditional SEO (Google rankings, backlinks, keyword research) Signal: AI visibility (ChatGPT/Claude/Perplexity discovery)

Example:

• Semrush shows you rank #3 on Google for “project management software”
• Signal shows ChatGPT mentions you 0% of the time when buyers describe remote team problems

Both matter: Google search isn’t going away, but AI-assisted discovery is growing 40% YoY.

Common workflow: Use Semrush for SEO, run Signal quarterly to catch AI visibility gaps.

---

What does Signal do that Gumshoe doesn’t?

5 Signal advantages:

1. Persona-based testing (not just generic prompts)

   • Signal: Tests 3-5 realistic buyer personas describing problems
   • Gumshoe: You write your own prompts (requires SEO expertise)

2. Custom ebook deliverable (not dashboard)

   • Signal: Comprehensive PDF report with prioritized recommendations
   • Gumshoe: Dashboard with metrics (you interpret what to do)

3. 15 minuteute deliberate analysis (not instant)

   • Signal: Multi-turn conversations, validated results
   • Gumshoe: Synchronous instant results (faster but can sacrifice accuracy)

4. Flat-fee pricing (not usage-based)

   • Signal: $50 flat
   • Gumshoe: $0.10/conversation (can spiral to $300+/mo)

5. API coming 2025 (Gumshoe doesn’t have API)

   • Signal: REST API roadmap announced
   • Gumshoe: No API available yet

---

When should I use Gumshoe instead of Signal?

Use Gumshoe if:

• You need weekly or daily monitoring (Signal is quarterly/monthly)
• You’re an SEO expert comfortable writing custom prompts
• You’re an agency testing multiple clients with diverse scenarios
• You want real-time dashboard (not PDF reports)
• You prefer pay-per-use over one-time fees

Use Signal if:

• You need quarterly strategic audits (not daily monitoring)
• You want done-for-you personas (not DIY prompts)
• You’re a founder or marketer (not SEO specialist)
• You want actionable recommendations (not just metrics)
• You prefer flat fees over usage-based pricing

Hybrid approach: Use Signal quarterly for strategic insights, use Gumshoe for weekly monitoring

---

Does Signal have an API? Does Gumshoe?

Signal: API coming 2025 (early access waitlist open)

• Planned: POST /signal, GET /reports/:id, webhooks
• Current: Intelligence Tokens (structured JSON with every report)
• Join API waitlist →

Gumshoe: No API yet (not announced on roadmap)

• “API access is coming soon” (per their website, no timeline)
• Current: Manual dashboard only

Competitive advantage: Signal will have API before Gumshoe-developer moat for automation, integrations, and programmatic reporting.

Why this matters: Agencies and SaaS companies need API for automated client reporting, Zapier integrations, and time-series tracking.

Learn about Intelligence Tokens → →

---