SupaIntent vs Searchable: Features and Pricing

The problem both tools solve

Your content team already knows how to write a product guide. What it needs to know is which guide to improve, which claim AI repeats and why competitors appear in the buyer’s shortlist.

SupaIntent and Searchable both help investigate AI visibility through monitoring, competitors and sources. Searchable also bundles technical checks and AI content creation, as described in Ryan Doser’s September review.

When your writers and publishing process are already in place, SupaIntent Growth offers a lower monthly paid starting budget at $99. The buying decision is whether you need research for that existing team or a bundle that also generates articles.

Research at a lower monthly entry

Executive takeaway: begin paid brand research below $100/month. Searchable Pro starts at $125/month. SupaIntent Growth starts at $99, with 50 monitored prompts. Both cover core monitoring tasks; their starting allowances and content workflow differ.

Searchable includes article generation. SupaIntent’s Action Plan recommends work for your team to carry out; it does not generate or publish articles. That is an additional capability in Searchable’s bundle. SupaIntent’s advantage in this comparison is its lower monthly starting price.

Monitoring budget or writing bundle?

Our Growth plan costs $99/month for 50 prompts. Searchable Pro costs $125 for 100 prompts, 9,000 AI answers and 200 site audits, according to the September pricing breakdown. SupaIntent’s paid monthly entry is $26 lower.

The packages have different capacities. Searchable’s starting prompt allowance is larger, and its bundle includes generation. This comparison does not claim a lower price per prompt or identical subscriptions. If your initial monitoring program fits within 50 questions and your team writes its own material, the lower recurring entry budget is a concrete reason to choose SupaIntent.

If you want the platform itself to produce articles, that requirement points toward a different package. SupaIntent’s Action Plan gives recommendations grounded in project data. It does not automatically create or publish the recommended material.

Give your content team the evidence

SupaIntent gives your team a question, a theme, the original answer and a cited source to work from. Combine that evidence with category research, page monitoring and technical checks to build a concrete content brief.

Put your editorial questions in market context

In Prompt Monitor, track your own questions in ChatGPT, Google AI Mode and Gemini. Add prompts in bulk, organize them into thematic groups and expand your list with suggestions drawn from collected answers. Each question shows brand visibility, average position, trends, the leading brand and the main competitor. Open its full answer history with mentions and sources.

The project has 20 prepared category questions, with a choice of which ones contribute to statistics. Category Visibility adds a separate regular study of brands in the category, including mentions, positions, visibility trends and sources. Competitor analytics automatically discovers brands, compares mention counts, average positions and Share of Voice, and opens supporting answers by prompt and service. Choose which competitors participate in the analysis.

Find the claim that needs attention

Consider an illustrative editorial meeting. A competitor wins questions about integrating a product with an existing stack. Your team has an integration guide, but needs to understand whether AI uses it and what the competing answer says.

Start with Content Gaps to find the questions and supporting responses. Topic sentiment helps inspect the claims AI associates with your brand. Then open citation analysis to read the source pages behind the recommendation.

Use the brand/topic matrix to inspect positive, negative and neutral assessments, follow their history and read the supporting excerpts. Content Gaps identifies themes where your brand leads as well as those where competitors are more visible. That helps the editor decide which strengths to preserve and which gaps to address.

Follow the sources and your chosen pages

Brand Pages shows which pages of your own site are cited, how often, by which AI services and for which prompts. Open related answers for your selected period. Add the integration guide’s URL to Content Monitor and follow whether it appears in subsequent collected answers. Content Monitor accepts links to your own or external publications. This tracks the selected URL among observed sources; it does not crawl every page of your site.

Compare citation frequency, answer coverage and source types across your own and competing sites. Filter citations by period, provider, prompt group, individual prompt or source and open the related answers. Export the records in CSV or Excel when your editorial brief needs a shareable evidence file.

Tech Review checks robot access, robots.txt, sitemaps, llms.txt, content in HTML, structure, semantics, metadata and company information. It supplies scores by area, an overall score, problems, recommendations and change history. Action Plan combines technical problems with content gaps, source opportunities and negative themes. Your editor can use those priorities to assign a concrete change: clarify a limitation, add a missing implementation step or update a page that supports an inaccurate claim.

Continue the investigation over time

For follow-up questions, use the built-in project chat to compare periods or retrieve supporting evidence. Save, continue and archive conversations. Pro’s MCP access lets an external agent read the project’s metrics and supporting records.

For a product guide or location page, search, filter and sort the Products & Places cards found in project and category answers, with images, links and available attributes. On Pro, Ads Radar shows advertisers, ad content and links, filters by service and prompt, placement trends and leading advertisers’ share of observed ads. These views give your team additional material to inspect alongside the recommendation’s wording and sources.

Investigate Reddit, YouTube and review sources

SupaIntent gives you dedicated views of the communities, videos and review pages cited in AI answers. Use them to identify the discussions and publishers your team should read before choosing where to contribute, update information or explain your product.

Reddit Radar: find the conversations AI draws on

See the most-cited communities and discussions, how often they appear, which AI services cite them and which brands appear in the associated answers. Reddit Radar also separates external sources that explicitly mention Reddit. Your team can follow a recurring concern to a specific discussion and decide whether it deserves attention.

YouTube Radar: identify the videos behind recommendations

Find leading cited channels and videos, with citation frequency and the share of collected answers that cite YouTube. Inspect available publication dates, duration, views, likes, comments and channel subscriber counts. These details help your team assess the cited material and choose which product explanation or demonstration to investigate.

Review Radar: inspect the pages shaping the shortlist

Explore cited sources from platforms such as G2, Trustpilot, Capterra, Clutch, Gartner Peer Insights and Tripadvisor. Review Radar ranks platforms by citation frequency and brands by their presence in answers containing review-platform links. Inspect specific pages, separated into profiles, categories, comparisons, reviews and complaints, then open the supporting AI answers. This gives your team a concrete source to assess when reviewing its positioning or reputation.

Choose SupaIntent

Choose SupaIntent to connect buyer questions, topic sentiment, source evidence, selected-page monitoring and technical review with your team’s next task. Growth offers a $99/month starting point for this research workflow.

Sources and scope

Checked in September 2026. Ryan Doser’s September review supplies the current monthly price and starting allowances. Ecommerce Fastlane’s March review provides additional workflow context for monitoring, auditing and content generation; its older prices are not used here.

This SupaIntent-authored comparison uses specific descriptions from publishers with commercial interests. Prices are monthly, excluding annual discounts, taxes and custom agreements. Our claims cover customer capabilities, excluding Beta and internal tools, with access dependent on subscription. The scenario is illustrative. Technical checks are different in scope, and the table does not rate audit depth, answer accuracy or business results.