Superlines: best AI search visibility solution you haven't heard about in 2026?

Superlines is an AI search visibility platform that measures how often answer engines mention your brand and cite your site, then routes the gaps into assignable work. It covers ChatGPT, Perplexity, Copilot, Google AI Overviews, Google AI Mode, Gemini, Claude, DeepSeek, Mistral and Grok, with three engines on the standard plans and up to ten on Enterprise.

This in-depth review was done in September, 2026 by Lari Numminen based on a customer data set running a full 3 week trial. Full video demo can be seen below.

Short recap of my Superlines review

In my view, four things set Superlines apart from other AI search visibility solutions:

1. Unique share of voice and brand ranking rate express your mention rate against named competitors per prompt and per model, so the data supports a competitive argument.

2. The Action Center converts findings into tasks with owners and status, covering on-page and off-page work.

3. The AI topical map plots share of voice against topical presence across every peer in the category.

4. And the MCP server ships on every plan, including the €79 entry tier, which puts the whole dataset inside Claude.

Pricing starts at €79 per month for 50 prompts across three answer engines. The Pro tier at €199 covers 150 prompts and three brands, which fits most growth companies. Growth runs €379 for 300 prompts, and agency and enterprise packages are quoted individually.

Verdict: Superlines is a strong AI search visibility platform that leads the category on competitive and topical analysis and on actionable recommendations, with an exceptionally good MCP on top. It is the strongest pick for an in-house marketing team that wants AI search data inside its own workflow. Its closest peers are Peec AI and Promptwatch, while Profound and the SEO suites cost more for comparable coverage.

What Superlines does

Superlines runs a fixed set of prompts against answer engines on a daily schedule, records every response, and reads three things out of each one. It logs whether your brand was named, whether your website was cited, and which competitors appeared in the same answer.

At the collection layer, that describes every tool in the category. What varies is what happens to the responses afterwards. Superlines carries them through competitive scoring, topic clustering, opportunity generation and task assignment, then exposes all of it over an API and an MCP server.

Superlines is based in Helsinki and is gaining traction with enterprise and agency customers, particularly in Northern Europe. Few people outside that circle have heard of it yet. The dashboard is one of the cleanest in the category.

I tested it for three weeks with one of our clients, a B2B software company, on tracking data covering 7 August to 3 September 2026 across five engines and roughly 2,600 responses. The numbers below come from that account, pulled through the MCP into Claude.

The metrics: brand visibility, citation rate, share of voice and rank rate

Four measures carry the weight here, and each answers a different question.

Brand visibility is the share of tracked responses that name your brand. On the account I tested it ran 20.52% on Perplexity, 19.44% on ChatGPT, 11.33% on Copilot and 4.89% on Google AI Overviews, against an industry average of 14.6%.

Citation rate is the share of responses that link to your website. It diverges from visibility much more than people expect. The same account was cited in 41.51% of Perplexity responses and 1.01% of AI Overviews, which is the distance between an engine that shows its sources and an engine that answers from a synthesised summary.

Unique share of voice is your brand's mentions as a proportion of all brand mentions in the same responses. It is the competitive number, and it is the one that changes decisions. That account scored its highest visibility on Google AI Mode at 50.67%, and its highest share of voice on AI Overviews at 7.57%, where visibility was lowest. AI Mode names a dozen vendors per answer, so presence there is cheap. AI Overviews names two or three, so each mention is worth far more. Share of voice put those five engines in almost the reverse order from visibility, and it is the order that should decide where the effort goes.

Brand ranking rate captures where you land in the sequence when several brands are named, which matters because position one in a generated list carries most of the click and most of the recall.

Every one of these can be sliced by prompt, by answer engine, by individual model, by topic and by label. The Visibility Rankings by Topic view then ranks the top ten brands in each topic cluster, so you can see that a client holds position one for "ServiceNow integration alternatives" while sitting fifth for "managed integration services". That gap is a content brief. The topic view also surfaces something easy to miss. The competitor set itself changes from one topic cluster to the next, so the rivals you benchmark against on your core category may barely appear in the cluster you are trying to build. Citation data for your own domain and for each competitor sits alongside it, which is where the content opportunities in a segment become visible.

Country and language level tracking

The account I worked on carried two domains for the same brand, one US English and one German, each with its own prompt set and its own competitor list, reported through a single organisation view. Every market in Superlines is configured that way, with country and language set at domain level.

Every plan includes unlimited country and language tracking. That matters more than it sounds. Answer engines respond differently by language for reasons that have nothing to do with your site, usually because the local source material is thinner and the model leans harder on whichever vendor has published in that language. A single global visibility number hides that entirely, and any brand selling into more than one market is making decisions off an average that describes nowhere.

Fan-out queries and the visibility heatmap

Two reporting views go further than most tools in the category. Fan-out query reporting is fairly extensive, showing the sub-searches an answer engine runs behind each tracked prompt, which is the level where content actually gets retrieved and cited. I have not seen this depth of fan-out data in many other AI visibility tools.

The competitor heatmap takes every brand visible in the market and shows its visibility model by model. It shows which companies own which language models, and an engine-specific gap stands out at a glance.

The AI Competitive map

The Topical Presence view is the feature I have not seen executed this well anywhere else. It plots every brand in the category on two axes, AI share of voice horizontally and AI topical presence vertically, and colours them by tier.

Share of voice tells you how loud a brand is. Topical presence tells you across how many distinct topics it registers at all. The combination produces four readings, and the quadrant labels are doing real work:

• Leaders score high on both. On the account I tested this was Workato, at roughly 17% share of voice and a topical presence of 80.
• Hidden experts have depth without volume. They are cited across many topics but rarely lead an answer, which usually means the content exists and the brand signal does not. This is the cheapest gap to close.
• Hollow presence is the mirror. High share of voice concentrated in one or two topics, which looks healthy on a summary dashboard and breaks the moment a buyer asks a question one step outside the brand's home ground.
• Minimal presence is the long tail, and in a mature category it is most of the map.

The panels underneath name the category leaders, the hidden experts and the topic gaps, so the analysis starts with a list of brands to examine. For anyone building a positioning case, this single view does more work than a month of prompt-level exports.

The Action Center

The Action Center is where Superlines stops describing and starts prescribing. It generates recommendations weekly from the visibility data and files them into six categories covering both sides of the optimisation problem: new content, content optimisation, technical fixes, community and discussions, media outreach, and prompt tracking.

The off-page items are the ones worth paying for, because most tools in this category cannot produce them at all. A real example from the account I tested, verbatim from the platform: pitch an editorial team to add the brand to their "Integration Platforms" category, on the grounds that the domain is the fifth most-cited in the competitive landscape with 335 citations across 16 tracked prompts where the brand is absent. That is a named target, a named reason and a measured size of prize. A PR freelancer could act on it without a briefing call.

Each card carries an impact rating, the engines it affects, the source domain, and controls to assign an owner and mark it seen or done. Counters at the top track done this week, completed total, and in progress. It is light case management, and for a two or three person marketing team that weight is right. The account I looked at had 39 open items, which is also a fair warning. The generator produces more than most teams will ever work through, so someone has to be willing to close items without doing them.

Site crawl, AI bot analytics and the built-in SEO tools

The website intelligence layer covers ground that most visibility trackers leave to a separate subscription. Its site crawl scores pages on technical health, content quality and AEO readiness, with audits running monthly on Pro and weekly on Growth. The schema optimiser checks structured data and proposes markup an answer engine can parse. There is also a content generation tool for drafting against an identified gap, which I did not test in depth. Whether it earns a place depends on where your content is already produced. A team drafting in Claude or its own content stack may not need it.

The technical recommendations held up when we checked them. The bot analytics are the more interesting half. Once site health, Google Analytics and crawler analytics are connected, Superlines separates AI crawler traffic from human traffic and identifies the agents by name, GPTBot, OAI-SearchBot and ClaudeBot among them, then attributes referral visits and the queries behind them. This is the closest thing available to a leading indicator. Crawl activity on a page precedes citation of that page, so a section that has started attracting GPTBot without yet being cited is the page to improve this month.

An unusually good MCP server

Every vendor in this category now claims an integration. Most of them mean a CSV export, a Zapier trigger or a beta API on the enterprise tier. Superlines ships a genuine MCP server, on every plan, including the €79 one.

The server exposes 37 tools across six groups covering brand and domain management, prompt management, core metrics, webpage intelligence, competitive intelligence, and strategy and insights. Authentication runs on an API key, OAuth 2.0 or Firebase tokens, over HTTP POST with server-sent events for the long operations. The analytics tools are read-only, so there is no configuration risk in pointing an agent at them.

Connecting it to Claude took a few minutes and it has not misbehaved since. Those per-engine numbers came out of one question asked in plain English, answered as structured JSON, with brand, domain, date range, metric list and group-by dimension all set from the request. No export, no spreadsheet, no dashboard screenshot.

What that changes is where the analysis happens. A monthly report becomes a query against your own data, sitting alongside your Search Console numbers, your CRM and whatever else your assistant can already reach. Superlines has also written the server well enough that the tool descriptions instruct the model correctly. Several MCP servers I have tested hand back data the model then misreports, because nothing in the response tells it what the fields mean.

If your team already works in Claude, the MCP is a strong reason to put Superlines on the shortlist.

Superlines pricing

All tiers include a 7-day trial, unlimited competitor tracking, unlimited country and language tracking, daily prompt frequency and the MCP server. Agency packages mirror the same tiers with client brand counts of 5, 10, 20 and unlimited, at a 15% partner discount.

The Pro tier is the one that fits most growth companies. Fifty prompts covers a single market with a handful of topics. Split fifty across two markets and four topic clusters and you are down to eight prompts per cluster, where every weekly movement is noise. At 150 prompts the topic-level views become readable and the topical map has enough underneath it to be trusted. For anyone paying four times €199 a month for a traditional SEO suite, the ratio is worth a second look.

How Superlines compares to key alternatives

Five tools come up in almost every evaluation I run alongside Superlines. Here is where each one sits.

Against Ahrefs Brand Radar and Semrush. Both are SEO suites that grew an AI visibility layer, and both carry the cost of the suite underneath. Brand Radar's Custom Prompts start at $50 a month with the AI Visibility Index a separate $199, on top of an Ahrefs subscription. Semrush bundles AI search into plans from $139 and opens MCP access at the $199 Starter tier. Superlines is purpose-built, and the interface reaches an action faster. A share-of-voice movement arrives attached to the domain worth pitching and the prompt cluster it affects, which is a working brief. For a team already paying for one of these suites, the arithmetic can still favour staying put.

Against Profound. Profound is the enterprise pick and earns it on research depth and content tooling, where it remains the more developed platform. The price ladder is the problem for smaller teams. Its $99 Starter tracks ChatGPT alone, and three engines begin at $399 for 100 prompts. Superlines covers 150 prompts across three engines at €199 and stays simple enough for a two-person team to run without an analyst.

Peec AI and Promptwatch, the closest peers. These two sit nearest to Superlines, and the feature sets overlap almost entirely. Peec matches the prompt ladder at 50, 150 and 350 and reserves API access for Enterprise, so the MCP is where Superlines pulls ahead. Promptwatch is the tightest comparison of all, at $95 for 50 prompts across four models, with MCP and API access on every plan, which is the same commitment Superlines makes. Superlines is cheaper at the entry point and puts country and language tracking on all tiers, where Promptwatch holds country, state and city breakdowns for its $579 Business plan. Promptwatch answers back with a knowledge base and monthly AEO article generation that Superlines does not match.

One thing no feature table captures. Questions and feedback I sent during testing came back quickly, and the answers came from someone who had looked at the account. Several vendors in this category are markedly slower, and one never replied at all. In a category this young, where the definitions of the metrics are still moving, being able to ask a vendor what a number means and get a straight answer has practical value.

Who Superlines is for

Choose it if you are:

• An in-house marketing team that wants AI search data inside its existing workflow, especially one already running Claude
• Tracking more than one country or language for the same brand
• Looking for off-page and PR-shaped recommendations alongside on-page ones
• Working with a small team that needs the tool to double as a task list
• An agency that needs per-client brands at a defensible per-client cost

Look elsewhere if you are:

• Buying primarily for enterprise reporting infrastructure and deep historical baselines, where the incumbents still hold an advantage
• Choosing a platform mainly for built-in content generation, which I did not test in depth
• In need of raw API access on the entry tier, which starts at Growth even though the MCP does not

Verdict

Superlines is one of the strongest AI search visibility platforms I have tested. It measures brand and citation visibility with the competitive metrics that make the numbers arguable, and it identifies opportunities specific enough to hand to someone. In several areas it is ahead of the field. The AI Competitive map has no real equivalent elsewhere, and the Action Center, fed by competitor data broken down by topic and by model, reaches well beyond content into technical, community and media work. The bot analytics add the leading indicator that pure prompt trackers cannot.

The MCP is a genuine differentiator on top of that. Shipping it on the €79 plan rather than reserving it for enterprise is a decision about who the product is for, and the answer is the in-house team that has already built a workflow and wants this data inside it. The price-to-quality ratio is strong for agencies and in-house teams alike, especially those whose content production already runs in other tools. Buy it for the measurement and the competitive depth; the integration is what makes it stick.

Which tool to buy is a different question from what the answer engines are currently saying about your company, and the second one is worth asking first. Find out what it says about you. A 30-minute call. I'll have looked before we speak.

Frequently asked questions

Which answer engines does Superlines track?
ChatGPT, Perplexity, Microsoft Copilot, Google AI Overviews, Google AI Mode, Google Gemini, Claude, DeepSeek, Mistral and Grok. Standard plans let you pick any three, and Enterprise covers up to ten.

Does Superlines have an MCP server?
Yes, on every plan including the €79 Starter tier. It exposes 37 read-only analytics and management tools and authenticates with an API key, OAuth 2.0 or a Firebase token.

How often does Superlines refresh its data?
Prompts run daily on all plans. Site audits run monthly on Pro and weekly on Growth.

Can Superlines track different countries and languages separately?
Yes. Each market is configured as its own domain with its own prompts, competitors, country and language, and country and language tracking is unlimited on every plan.

What does Superlines cost?
€79 per month for 50 prompts and three answer engines, €199 for 150 prompts and three brands, €379 for 300 prompts and seven brands, and custom pricing above that. Agency packages carry a 15% partner discount.

How does Superlines compare to Peec AI and Promptwatch?
Feature sets overlap closely. Superlines is cheaper at the entry point at €79 against Peec's comparable band and Promptwatch's $95, and it includes country and language tracking on every tier. Peec reserves API access for Enterprise, while Promptwatch also ships MCP and API access on all plans and adds a knowledge base and monthly AEO article generation.

How does Superlines compare to Profound and Ahrefs Brand Radar?
Profound goes deeper on research and content tooling and costs more, with three engines starting at $399 a month for 100 prompts. Ahrefs Brand Radar is an add-on priced on top of an Ahrefs subscription, from $50 a month for Custom Prompts and $199 for the AI Visibility Index.