Comparison

Clarvia vs Profound

Both are serious tools. Here is how they differ.

Profound is the best funded company in this category and it does a lot well. This page sets out what we could verify from public pages in August 2026, including the places where Profound is ahead.

Side by side

CapabilityClarviaProfound
Pricing modelFlat rate per company, with unlimited users on every paid planPer brand or workspace, with answer engines gated by tier
Entry price$0 Free with one complete check, then $99 to $499 a month for the company$99/mo billed yearly, covering ChatGPT only
Ten client sitesTen separate accounts at the published per-company price, each with unlimited usersNot published. Tracking more than one company is an Enterprise conversation quoted through a demo
Shows the fix in context on the rendered pageYes. Suggestions are positioned on a live render of your pageWe found no published evidence (Aug 2026). The action layer is agent configuration plus dashboards
Applies the fixYesYes. Agents write content and push drafts into your CMS for human review
Re-scores after a changeYes. Re-scan and re-score the page you changedPartial. Citation Decay tracks citation lifetime per URL (Aug 2026), which is not the same as attributing a re-score to a specific edit
Content drafting and publishingYes. AI content writer, with CMS pushYes. WordPress, Sanity and Contentful, drafts queued for review
Answer engine coverageCitation simulation across Perplexity, Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini and Google AI OverviewsUp to nine answer engines on Enterprise; the $99 tier is ChatGPT only
SetupSelf-serve from a URLSelf-serve on Starter and Growth; Enterprise is demo led
Enterprise controlsEU data residency, Norwegian companySSO, SAML and SOC2
Nordic and language supportNorwegian company, data held in the EU, product in English and NorwegianNot published

Cells reading Not published or We found no published evidence mean exactly that: we located no public statement either way. That is not a claim the capability is missing.

What Profound does well

Scale, and the proof of it

Profound serves more than 700 enterprises including Target, Walmart, Figma and MongoDB, and raised $96M at a $1B valuation in February 2026. If you are buying for a large organisation, that track record is a real answer to a real question.

Breadth of measurement

Up to nine answer engines on Enterprise, plus a prompt-volume dataset covering demand across AI search. Pages gives a per-page view of citations, bot activity and page health, and Citation Decay tracks how long a citation survives.

Agents that publish

Profound Agents draft content and push it into WordPress, Sanity and Contentful, queued for human review rather than auto-published. That is a genuine action layer, shipped and documented in January 2026.

Enterprise readiness

SSO, SAML and SOC2 are in place. For a procurement process that starts with a security questionnaire, that matters more than any feature comparison.

How Clarvia differs

Configured versus seen

Profound’s action layer is configured: you build an agent, pick a template, set a brand kit, and review the resulting drafts in your CMS. Clarvia’s is seen: the suggested change is positioned on a render of the page you already have, so you read it in context before you accept it. We found no published evidence of an on-page view of suggestions in Profound as of August 2026.

Re-scoring the change you just made

Both products keep measuring. The narrower thing Clarvia does is tie a re-score to a specific applied change: you accept a fix, push it, and re-scan that page to see the score move. Profound’s Citation Decay measures citation lifetime per URL, which answers a different question.

A published price for ten clients

An agency with ten client sites can read Clarvia’s number off the pricing page: the Agency tier is $499 a month with unlimited users and as many websites as its capacity covers, or the agency can refer each client and earn 30% of what they pay. The equivalent number at Profound is not published, because tracking more than one company sits in the Enterprise tier and is quoted through a demo. The equivalent number at Profound is not published, because tracking more than one company sits in the Enterprise tier and is quoted through a demo.

Pricing reality

Both ladders as of August 2026, retrieved from the vendors’ own pricing pages.

Profound, as of August 2026

$99/mo billed yearly tracks ChatGPT only. Useful engine coverage starts at $399/mo billed yearly. Tracking more than one company is Enterprise and quoted through a demo, so an agency running ten clients has no published price to compare against. Starter and Growth prices were both published on tryprofound.com/pricing on 17 August 2026.

Clarvia, as of August 2026

Free covers one complete check of one site, with every fix shown but locked. Solo is $99 a month (990 kr) for one website, up to 50 pages, checked weekly, with 25 AI questions tracked monthly. Team is $249 (2 490 kr) for three websites and 100 questions tracked weekly, plus a multi-client console. Agency is $499 (4 990 kr) for as many websites as your capacity covers, 300 questions weekly and white-label reports. Enterprise starts at $1 500 and is quoted. Every paid tier has unlimited users and nothing a smaller customer could use is withheld from it. Extra credits are $39 for 200, bought when you want them, and nothing is ever charged automatically. Prices are ex. VAT and annual billing is two months free.

See your own page first

The fastest way to judge either product is on a page you own. Scan yours free, read the suggestions in context, and decide from there.

Run a free scan

One complete check, free. No credit card needed to start.

Other comparisons

Competitor details retrieved August 2026 from public pages; tell us if something is outdated: [email protected]