Noma vs Peec AI
Two AI search visibility tools, compared on what each one tracks, what it costs, and which problem it is actually built to solve.
- Both are dedicated AI search visibility tools, so this is a straight like-for-like. Neither is an SEO suite with a bolt-on. The differences are which engines get named, what is published about price, and how far the tracking goes past the mention.
- Peec covers six surfaces on every plan, which is broader than Noma. ChatGPT, Google AI Mode, AI Overviews, Microsoft Copilot, Perplexity and Gemini, on all four tiers. If Copilot or AI Mode matter to your buyers, Peec covers ground Noma does not, and no framing changes that.
- Noma names Claude and Grok, which Peec’s published list does not include. Five engines — ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Claude and Grok — polled daily, with the page behind each citation recorded and share of voice measured per prompt. Breadth and depth are different axes, and the two products have picked different ones.
- Peec publishes no prices at all. Four tiers are listed, annual billing only, with no figures, prompt allowances or seat counts. Noma starts on a 14-day trial with no card and unlimited seats. You can find out what Noma costs you before a sales call.
Why AI search visibility needs its own tool
When someone asks an assistant for a recommendation in your category, the answer names two or three brands and stops. There is no second page and usually no click. A category of tools now exists purely to measure that, and Peec AI and Noma are both in it, which makes this an unusually clean comparison: no SEO suite claiming an AI tab, just two products doing the same job differently.
The interesting question is not who covers more surfaces. It is which surfaces, and what the tool does once it finds you are absent. Peec has gone wide across Google’s AI properties and Copilot. Noma has gone deep on five named engines, recording the source page behind every citation.
Everything said about Peec here comes from their published pricing page as checked on the date above. Where they publish nothing — and on price, that is everything — this page says so rather than guessing.
What to look for in an AI visibility tool
Four questions separate tools that change what a team does from tools that add a dashboard. They are worth asking of both products below, and of whatever you are using today.
Engine coverage and cadence
A tool that watches four engines cannot tell you about the fifth, and an infrequent reading cannot separate a real shift from noise. Ask which engines are covered and how often each is polled before anything else.
Mentions versus citations
Knowing you were mentioned is a score. Knowing which page the engine drew on is a task list. If a marketplace listing is cited instead of your own product page, that is a fixable problem you cannot see from mention counts alone.
Prompts, not keywords
Nobody types "best sunscreen oily skin india" into an assistant; they ask a question. A prompt set assembled from real customer questions gives a different — and more honest — visibility picture than one derived from a keyword export.
Recommendations you can action
Most tools in this category are good at telling you that you are absent. The useful ones tell you why, and rank the fixes by expected impact so a content team knows what to write first.
Noma vs Peec AI, feature by feature
| Capability | Noma | Peec AI |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | AI search visibility tool | AI search visibility tool |
| Surfaces tracked | Five — ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Claude, Grok | Six — ChatGPT, AI Mode, AI Overviews, Copilot, Perplexity, Gemini |
| Claude coverage | Yes | Not on the published list |
| Grok coverage | Yes | Not on the published list |
| Google AI Mode and AI Overviews | Not covered | Covered on every plan |
| Microsoft Copilot | Not covered | Covered on every plan |
| Published pricing | 14-day free trial, no card; paid plans after | None — four tiers listed, no figures |
| Billing options | Monthly and annual | Annual only, per the pricing page |
| Prompt allowance | Not metered by plan | Not published |
| Team seats | Unlimited | Not published |
| Polling cadence | Daily | Referenced by tier, values not published |
| Citation source tracking | Records which page each engine cited | Not published |
| Creator marketing | Included via Nia — free, 10M+ profiles | Not offered |
| Paid media analysis | Included via Pulse — Google and Meta Ads | Not offered |
Rows come from Peec AI’s public pricing and product pages as checked at publication. “Not published” means their documentation does not state a position, not that the answer is bad. “Not offered” means outside the product’s stated scope, and a row saying so is a note about what each one sets out to do rather than a criticism.
Where Noma fits
Noma runs your category prompts against ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Claude and Grok on a schedule and records whether your brand is named in the answer each one generates. Five engines, polled daily — the fifth being Grok, which most tools in this category do not cover.
Being mentioned is only half the reading. When an engine cites a page, Noma records which page: your own site, a marketplace listing, a review roundup, or a competitor’s blog. That is the difference between knowing you are invisible and knowing what to do about it. Alongside the mention it captures the wording used to describe you, because being named as a budget option is a different outcome to being named as the category leader.
Share of voice is measured per prompt rather than as one site-wide number, because visibility is never uniform across a category — most brands are strong on a handful of questions and absent on the rest. The prompt set is built from questions customers actually ask rather than from a keyword list, and the recommendations that come back are ranked by expected impact: the pages to write, the wording to fix, the structured data to add.
Noma also sits on one platform with Nia for creator marketing and Pulse for paid media, so AI visibility can be read next to the channels competing with it for budget. Whether that matters depends entirely on whether you have those problems too.
What Noma actually measures
The rest of the platform: Noma for AI search visibility, Nia for creator marketing and attribution, Pulse for Google and Meta Ads — or how the three apply in your category.
Where Peec AI fits
Peec has made a deliberate and defensible bet on Google. Tracking AI Mode and AI Overviews alongside ChatGPT means they see the surfaces that sit closest to conventional search traffic, and adding Microsoft Copilot covers buyers inside organisations that run on Microsoft. Noma covers none of those three. If your category is one where a Google AI Overview is the first thing a customer reads, Peec is watching something Noma is not, and that is worth more than any number of feature rows.
What it does not cover
- Claude and Grok are not on their published engine list, so two of the five surfaces Noma watches are unaccounted for.
- No prices are published for any of the four tiers, so the cost of the product cannot be compared before a sales conversation.
- The pricing page shows annual billing only, so the commitment is a year before you know whether the category matters.
- Prompt allowances, seat counts and polling cadence are referenced by tier but the values are not published.
- Whether the source page behind a citation is recorded is not published, and that is the difference between a score and a list of pages to fix.
Which one your team actually needs
Category presence, before it is gone
AI answers name two or three brands and stop. There is no tenth position to occupy and no long tail to fall back on — you are in the answer or you are not in the consideration set at all. The number worth reporting upward is share of voice across the questions customers actually ask, tracked over time, because it moves slowly and then all at once.
A discipline that diverges from ranking
AEO shares fundamentals with SEO — crawlability, structured data, credible sources — then parts company on what counts as success. A page can rank third for a keyword and never be named by an engine answering the same question. Measuring the two with one tool produces a confident answer to the wrong question.
What to write, in what order
Citation source data turns AEO from a theory into a queue. If engines are quoting a review roundup for your category, the work is getting into that roundup. If they are quoting a competitor’s comparison page, the work is writing a better one. Both are concrete; a visibility score is not.
The cost of finding out
For a brand that has not yet established whether AI search matters in its category, the first question is what it costs to find out. A trial that needs no card answers that in a fortnight. A monthly commitment answers it in a procurement cycle.
What a rollout looks like
AI visibility is not a switch. This is the sequence that gets a team from “we think we are missing from these answers” to a trend a content team can work against.
Phase 1 — Baseline
Week 1–2- Build the prompt set
Start from the questions customers ask in your category rather than from a keyword export. Twenty good prompts beat two hundred derived ones.
- Name the competitors you care about
Share of voice is only meaningful against a defined set. Pick the brands you actually lose to.
- Take the first reading
Establish where you appear, where you do not, and which sources engines cite instead of you. This is the number everything after is measured against.
Phase 2 — Fix the sources
Week 3–8- Answer the question in the first two sentences
Engines quote what is quotable. A page that opens with positioning and reaches the answer in paragraph six will not be cited.
- State facts that can be verified and attributed
Add the structured data that lets an engine attribute a claim to your brand rather than to whoever restated it.
- Get into the roundups engines already cite
If a third-party comparison is the source for your category, being absent from it is the whole problem. That is outreach work, not on-page work.
Phase 3 — Hold and widen
Ongoing- Read the trend weekly, not daily
Answers move as models and their sources update. Weekly is enough to tell a shift from noise in most categories.
- Widen the prompt set as the category moves
New questions appear. A prompt set fixed at launch slowly stops describing the category it was built for.
- Judge it against the rest of the budget
Nia for creator and Pulse for paid sit on the same platform, so AI visibility can be read next to the channels competing with it for spend.
The verdict
This one is a genuine toss-up decided by your category rather than by a feature count. If your buyers start at Google and you need AI Mode, AI Overviews or Copilot, Peec covers surfaces Noma does not and you should buy Peec. If Claude and Grok matter, or you want the source page behind each citation, share of voice per prompt, unlimited seats and the ability to find out what it costs before talking to anyone, Noma is the better fit. Anyone telling you one of these is simply better than the other has not read both pricing pages.
Choose Noma if
- Claude and Grok coverage matters to your category
- You need the page behind each citation, not only a mention count
- You want to know the price and start without a sales call
- Annual-only billing is not something you can commit to yet
- AI visibility should sit beside creator and paid performance in one place
Choose Peec AI if
- Google AI Mode or AI Overviews are where your buyers actually read answers
- Microsoft Copilot coverage is a requirement
- Six surfaces on the entry tier matters more than which five are named
Common questions
What is the difference between Noma and Peec AI?
Both track whether AI engines name your brand. Peec publishes six surfaces on every plan — ChatGPT, Google AI Mode, AI Overviews, Microsoft Copilot, Perplexity and Gemini — which is broader than Noma. Noma covers five, including Claude and Grok, which Peec’s published list does not name, polls them daily, records which page each engine cited, and measures share of voice per prompt. Peec publishes no prices; Noma starts on a 14-day trial with no card.
Does Peec AI track more AI engines than Noma?
It tracks more surfaces, six against five, and covers Google AI Mode, AI Overviews and Microsoft Copilot which Noma does not. It does not name Claude or Grok on its published list, which Noma does. Which matters depends entirely on where your buyers actually ask their questions.
What does Peec AI cost?
Their pricing page lists four tiers — Starter, Pro, Advanced and Enterprise — with annual billing and no published figures for any of them, and no published prompt allowances or seat counts. That is their choice to make; this page simply cannot tell you the number because they do not state it.
What does Noma cost?
A 14-day free trial with no credit card, then paid plans, with unlimited seats included. You can connect a brand, build a prompt set and see your first visibility report inside the trial window without speaking to anyone.
Which AI engines does Noma track?
ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google Gemini, Claude and Grok — five engines, polled daily, on every plan. It records whether your brand appears in each answer, which source the engine cited, and the wording used to describe you.
Can I use both?
You could, and for a brand where Google AI Overviews and Claude both matter it would genuinely close the gap. Most teams will not want two AI visibility subscriptions, which is why the honest advice is to pick based on which surfaces your buyers use rather than on which product markets harder.
Peec AI is a trademark of its respective owner. Nurdd is not affiliated with, endorsed by or sponsored by Peec AI. Marks and product names are used only to identify the products being compared, and every claim about Peec AI was taken from their own public pages on the date shown above.
Other comparisons
Find out whether AI engines name you
Build your prompt set and see your first visibility report inside the trial. Fourteen days, no credit card.