Profound VS AnswerWorthy

AnswerWorthy's answer:

Two things.

First, the audit is split in half on purpose. Facts like robots.txt and GPTBot access, JSON-LD, headings, authorship and visible dates are checked by plain code, so they cannot be hallucinated. Judgment calls like buyer-prompt coverage and passage extractability come from an AI pass that has to quote your page as evidence. The report always labels which is which.

Second, it looks past your own HTML: it runs unbranded buyer prompts through live assistants and shows you the actual answers, including the ones where a competitor gets named instead of you.

AnswerWorthy's answer:

Mostly for what it refuses to do. It will not promise you ChatGPT recommendations, AI Overview placement or citation counts, because nobody can control those. It sticks to the observable layer: what an assistant can reach, parse and quote from your page, and what assistants actually say today when someone asks a buying question in your category.

It is also a one-off purchase. $19 for the full report on a URL, no account and no subscription, while most tools here start at a monthly plan.

We also ran it on our own site first, fixed what it flagged, and published both the before and after reports, including the answers where competitors were recommended over us.

AnswerWorthy's answer:

Anyone whose buyers now ask an assistant before they ask Google. In practice: founders and marketers at small SaaS and ecommerce brands, agencies and freelancers checking client sites, SEO and content people adding AI search to an existing audit, and developers who want a concrete fix list instead of advice.

It runs on any public URL, so nobody needs to be a customer of anything to try it. The free scan is the entry point.

AnswerWorthy's answer:

• Next.js (App Router) and TypeScript, hosted on Vercel
• Tailwind CSS
• Postgres on Supabase
• OpenAI models for the analysis pass, behind a provider interface so the model can be swapped
• Zod, which validates every AI response before it is allowed into a report
• Stripe Checkout for the one-off payment, Resend for email

The crawl, the deterministic checks and the scoring are plain TypeScript with no model in the loop, which is deliberate: facts should not be generated.

AnswerWorthy's answer:

It started as a consulting question. Clients kept asking how to show up in ChatGPT and Perplexity, and most answers on the market were either a guess or a promise nobody can keep. So the tool was built around the opposite rule: report only what can be observed on the page or quoted from a real assistant answer.

Before launch we ran it across roughly 50 real sites and had people grade every AI sentence against the page it came from. That killed several ideas and produced 39 fixes, including cases where our own tool was overstating what it actually knew.

Then we pointed it at our own site. It scored 60. We fixed what it flagged, reached 100 the same day, and published both reports so the claim can be checked rather than believed.