Optimly

A ranking you never asked for

Buyers increasingly ask ChatGPT, Claude and Perplexity for recommendations instead of typing a query into Google — and the answer those models give is shaped by third-party sources a brand does not control. A company can be described accurately, or as a "Challenger" that AI only mentions after naming competitors, or with a story that is years out of date, and have no idea it is happening. Optimly's premise is that this new ranking is now measurable and fixable. It is part of a young category of AI-search visibility tools, and its free entry point — a full AI brand audit — is what separates it from most of them.

Five AI models, one scorecard

Optimly watches five AI surfaces — ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity and Grok — and analyzes both what they say about a brand and which third-party sources shaped that answer. Each brand profile carries four signals:

• Brand Authority — an overall visibility score, locked until the brand claims its profile.
• Archetype — how AI positions the brand: as the category leader, or as a Challenger mentioned only after competitors.
• Narrative accuracy — how consistent the AI's story is across models.
• Cross-model consistency — whether ChatGPT and Perplexity tell the same story or disagree.

The optimization layer is the claim flow: a brand claims its profile, answers five setup questions, and Optimly publishes verified facts into BrandVault — the source AI agents cite — plus a prioritized "fix card" of the single highest-value correction each week.

What an audit returns: a real brand's profile

Searching any brand returns its current AI profile in seconds. A search for a well-known workspace tool shows the shape of the output:

Notion — AI brand profile (pulled from 5 AI models)

• Brand Authority: Moderate (score locked until claimed)
• Archetype: Challenger — AI names competitors first
• Narrative accuracy: Moderate — mixed accuracy across models
• Cross-model consistency: High
• Biggest gap flagged: AI still describes Notion as a "passive knowledge base," missing its shift to an AI Agent platform that performs tasks in Slack and GitHub — a narrative that late-2023 training data may not reflect.

That last point is the product in one example: the audit does not just return a score, it names the specific story AI is getting wrong, and claiming the profile is the lever to correct it. The same audit lists buyer-intent queries where the brand appears, the competitors AI names alongside it, and integrity alerts for facts AI gets wrong.

The loop after the audit: claim, fix, re-measure

	Indexed (free)	Signal	Signal Pro
Brand AI audit	Any brand	Your brand, continuous	Your brand, continuous
Profile claiming	Yes	Yes	Yes
AI perception monitoring	One-time	Ongoing audits	Ongoing + deeper
Fix Cards / prioritization	—	Weekly	Daily
Price	$0	~$199 / mo	~$799 / mo

The free tier is genuinely usable for a one-time look at how AI describes you or a competitor. The paid tiers buy the loop — continuous monitoring, weekly prioritized fixes, and the verified-profile infrastructure that makes AI cite your version of the facts. The jump from free to Signal is steep, which is honest segmentation: this is a tool for brands that treat AI-search visibility as a real channel.

Who this serves

• ✓ Works for: marketing and brand teams whose buyers increasingly ask AI for recommendations; companies that already track SEO and want the AI-search layer added; any brand with a public profile it cannot control and wants to see what AI is currently saying — the free audit answers that in seconds.
• ✗ Not a fit for: companies with no brand-search presence to defend; teams expecting AI-search optimization on a budget, since the paid tiers price like enterprise software; anyone who wants automated fixes rather than guidance, because the tool identifies and prioritizes but the execution is still on you.