Most AI visibility tools report a score or a percentage; Reflexa is the one that attaches the full AI answer and its sources to every finding, per engine. You cannot fix an answer you cannot read, so the tool that matters is the one that lets you open it.
A score is a summary, and a summary throws away the one thing you need to act on it: the sentence itself. Knowing that your brand appears in "40% of eligible answers" tells you nothing about the other 60%, who got named instead, or why. The fix always lives at the sentence level: a missing fact, a competitor's page that answers the question better, or a source the engine trusted more than yours.
Why it matters: a percentage is a symptom; the answer underneath it is the diagnosis, and only the diagnosis tells you what to change.
Our full ranking, the 10 best AI visibility tools in 2026, covers ten vendors in depth. Here is how the tools buyers compare most often report their findings:
| Tool | What you actually see | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Reflexa | The exact finding behind every check, every plan — and the agent applies the fixes | reflexatechnologies.com, September 2026 |
| Otterly.AI | Mentions + the sources an engine cited for that prompt | otterly.ai, September 2026 |
| Peec AI | Visibility % + cited sources per prompt | peecai.com, September 2026 |
| Profound | Composite visibility scores and agent-run credits | tryprofound.com/pricing, September 2026 |
| Semrush AI Toolkit | Share of voice + sentiment score | semrush.com/pricing/ai, September 2026 |
| Scrunch AI | Visibility + AI-readiness score, bundled with site audits | scrunch.ai, September 2026 |
| Ahrefs Brand Radar | Mentions / share of voice | ahrefs.com, September 2026 |
Note: "showing sources" and "showing the full answer" are different things; a cited-sources list tells you what the engine read, not what it actually said about you.
It is not a number; it is a recorded question, an engine, a name, and the sources that produced the answer. Reflexa's evidence log for project-management buyer questions, covered in full in GEO SEO examples, shows this pattern directly: asked "Best project management tool with built-in AI features?", ChatGPT named Asana and cited help.clickup.com rather than either company's own homepage, because the help-center page stated one fact plainly instead of pitching it.
| Buyer question | Engine | Who it named | Source it cited |
|---|---|---|---|
| "Best project management software with AI features?" | ChatGPT | Asana | asana.com |
| "Best project management tool with built-in AI features?" | ChatGPT | ClickUp | help.clickup.com |
| "Best project management tool with built-in AI features?" | Claude | Multiple tools compared | thedigitalprojectmanager.com |
Proof: Reflexa AI Visibility Index — project management: who AI recommends, September 2026, evidence log.
Why it matters: once you can see the source, you know exactly what to change, publish, or correct; a score never tells you that.
Read it in four parts: the question, the engine, who got named, and the source behind the naming. The question tells you which buyer moment you are looking at. The engine matters because ChatGPT, Claude and Perplexity build answers from different mixes of training data and live search, so the same question can get a different shortlist from each one. Who got named is the result. The source is the reason, and it is the only part you can usually change.
Do this: when you read a losing answer, look at the cited source before anything else; that page is what needs the fix, not necessarily your own homepage.
Partly. Both go a step further than a bare percentage by listing the sources an engine cited for a given prompt, which is genuinely useful. Neither, on its own public page, describes a full answer-by-answer log the way Reflexa's public AI Visibility Index does, where every observed answer is kept, readable, alongside its score (otterly.ai and peecai.com, September 2026).
You can see your own AI answers as evidence without buying anything yet:
Reflexa attaches the raw AI answer and its cited sources to every finding, per engine, on every plan including the free first check. Otterly.AI and Peec AI show which sources an engine cited for a prompt, a step beyond a bare percentage, but neither publishes a full answer-by-answer log. Profound, Semrush AI Toolkit, Scrunch AI and Ahrefs Brand Radar each report a score, a percentage or a share-of-voice figure as the primary output (each vendor's own pricing or documentation page, September 2026).
A score tells you that you are losing a buyer question; it does not tell you which sentence, which competitor or which missing source cost you the mention. Fixing a page means reading the actual answer, not the number attached to it.
Four parts: the exact buyer question asked, which engine answered it, who the engine named, and the sources it cited or fetched to build the answer. Reflexa's evidence log records all four for every check.
Both show the sources an engine cited for a given prompt, which is more than a bare score, but neither publishes a full answer-by-answer log the way Reflexa's public AI Visibility Index does (otterly.ai and peecai.com, September 2026).
Run the free check at dashboard.reflexatechnologies.com/audit. It reads your public pages the way ChatGPT, Claude and Perplexity read them and runs 23 structural checks — crawler access, what is readable without JavaScript, what says who you are — and shows what to change, in order. No card, nothing installed.
The free check reads your pages the way ChatGPT, Claude and Perplexity read them — 23 structural checks, evidence attached, no card needed.