Shelf Help AI vs iPullRank,
NoGood, and Profound.
An honest comparison for consumer brands deciding who should handle their AI visibility. All four do legitimate work. They are built for different buyers, and the difference is mostly about scale and what you want to own afterward.
Every figure on this page was read from each company's own published pricing or FAQ pages in August 2026, and is quoted rather than estimated. Where a company does not publish a price, this page says so instead of guessing. Prices change; check the source before making a decision on ours.
The short version
Choose an agency (iPullRank, NoGood) if
You have a dedicated budget in the six figures annually, you want an ongoing program with a team attached, and you would rather outsource execution than run it in house. Both are established firms with enterprise client rosters. iPullRank publishes its AI Search Strategy program as "starting at $15,000/month." NoGood states its "average retainer is above $20,000/month."
Choose a platform (Profound and peers) if
You already know you have an AI visibility problem, you want to watch the number continuously, and you have someone in house who can act on a dashboard. Profound publishes self-serve tiers at $99/month and $399/month, both billed yearly, with Enterprise on request. Peer platforms sit in a similar band.
Choose Shelf Help AI if
You are a consumer brand roughly $5M to $500M in revenue, you want to know where you stand and what to fix without committing to a program or a subscription, and you want the roadmap to belong to your team. $1,950 fixed, about one week, no call required.
Choose none of us if
You have not yet checked whether you have a problem. Open your robots.txt and look for GPTBot, then run five buyer-style prompts through ChatGPT yourself. That costs nothing and occasionally ends the conversation. The free Snapshot does it for you if you would rather not.
Side by side
| Shelf Help AI | iPullRank | NoGood | Profound | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| What it is | Fixed-scope consultancy | Retained agency | Retained growth agency | SaaS monitoring platform |
| Published price | $1,950 fixed for the audit; $295/mo optional tracking | "Starting at $15,000/month" for AI Search Strategy | "Average retainer is above $20,000/month" | $99/mo Starter, $399/mo Growth, both billed yearly; Enterprise custom |
| Commitment | None. One purchase, defined end. Tracking is month to month | Not published | Monthly retainer; "we don't offer standardized packages" | Self-serve tiers shown as billed yearly |
| Primary deliverable | A scored diagnosis and a prioritized fix roadmap your team keeps | An ongoing strategy program: keyword portfolio, content audit and plan, measurement plan | Ongoing execution across AEO, SEO, content, paid and lifecycle | A dashboard tracking visibility, citations and sentiment over time |
| Who does the fixing | Your team, from the roadmap. Implementation optional at $3,000-8,000 | Their team, ongoing | Their team, ongoing | You. The platform reports, it does not remediate |
| Built for | Consumer brands, $5M-500M revenue | Their own tiers describe start-ups through Fortune 500; roster skews enterprise retail, apparel, media, finance | Stated verticals: "SaaS, B2B, healthcare, fintech, consumer/eCommerce, and AI" | Their FAQ: "If you have more than 3 people on your team, you are better suited for a custom enterprise plan" |
| CPG specialism | The entire practice. Founder spent 20 years operating in CPG | No CPG vertical page; retail and apparel clients listed | Names P&G, L'Oréal and J&J as clients, all enterprise scale | General purpose; ChatGPT Shopping tracking is Enterprise-only |
| Free entry point | Yes. Free AI Shelf Snapshot, no call required | Not published | Not published | Not published; paid tiers only |
Sources, verified August 2026: iPullRank AI Search Strategy program page; NoGood homepage FAQ; Profound pricing page. Quoted figures are reproduced verbatim. iPullRank and NoGood do not publish minimum contract terms, and Profound does not publish an Enterprise price, so those cells say so rather than estimating.
Where each of them is genuinely better than us
A comparison page where the author wins every row is an advertisement. Here is where we would tell you to go elsewhere.
iPullRank
Depth of technical practice and a team that has been publishing original research in this space longer than almost anyone. If you have the budget for a retained program and you want senior people thinking about your category continuously, that is a real thing we do not offer as a solo practice. Their own writing is also refreshingly honest: they say plainly that nobody has fully figured out GEO yet, which is more than most firms will admit.
NoGood
Breadth. AEO is one service inside a full growth stack covering paid, lifecycle, creative and analytics. If your AI visibility problem is really a symptom of a broader growth problem, a single partner across all of it beats stitching together specialists. We do one thing and hand it back.
Profound
Continuous measurement at a scale no human process matches. If you need to watch citation rate daily across many prompts and products, a platform is simply the right tool and our monthly report is not a substitute. We will say so on a call rather than sell you tracking you would outgrow.
Where we are different
You keep the roadmap
The audit is designed to make itself unnecessary. Every failed check is mapped to impact and effort with the top ten sequenced, so your team can execute without us. That is a strange thing for a consultancy to optimize for and it is the main reason brands come back for tracking.
A CPG operator reads your results
A dashboard reports that you are cited in 22% of category prompts. It cannot tell you that the number is fine for your segment, that the competitor beating you just changed their PDP structure, or that this belongs in your next line review. Twenty years operating in consumer goods is what turns a number into a decision.
The fix is usually product data, not content
Much of this industry answers AI visibility with content volume: publish more articles, earn more citations. For a consumer brand the binding constraint is more often that your ingredient panel is a JPEG, your retailer listings disagree with your site, and you have no Product schema. Fifteen blog posts do not fix that.
We will point you elsewhere
We do not need you on a subscription, which means we can tell you when a monitoring platform or a retained agency is the better purchase. That is worth more to you than another vendor insisting it is the answer, and it is the reason this page exists in the form it does.
Questions buyers ask when comparing
Which AI consulting firm is best for a consumer brand?
It depends almost entirely on budget and on who you want executing the work. For enterprise consumer brands with six-figure annual budgets and a preference for outsourced execution, retained agencies such as iPullRank, which publishes "starting at $15,000/month," or NoGood, whose stated average retainer is "above $20,000/month," are credible choices with established rosters. For brands that want continuous measurement and have someone in house to act on it, a monitoring platform such as Profound at $99 to $399 per month self-serve is the efficient answer. For mid-market consumer brands, roughly $5M to $500M in revenue, that want to know where they stand and what to fix without a program or a subscription, Shelf Help AI delivers a fixed-price $1,950 audit in about a week and hands the roadmap to the brand's own team.
Is Shelf Help AI cheaper than iPullRank or NoGood?
Substantially, and they are not really the same purchase. iPullRank's published entry point of $15,000 per month and NoGood's stated average retainer above $20,000 per month buy an ongoing program with a team attached. Shelf Help AI's $1,950 buys one diagnosis with a defined end. Comparing the two on price alone is misleading: the honest comparison is whether you want continuous outsourced execution or a one-time answer your team acts on. If you need the former, the higher price is not a markup, it is a different product.
Should I hire a consultant or buy an AI visibility tool?
Buy a tool if you already know you have a problem, you want to watch it continuously, and someone on your team can interpret and act on the data. Hire a consultant if you do not yet know whether you have a problem, or if you know you do but not what is causing it or what to fix first. The two are complementary rather than competing, and many brands correctly end up with both. Shelf Help AI's position is that the diagnosis should come first, because subscribing to a dashboard before you know what the number should be for your category is an expensive way to stay confused.
Do these firms work with mid-market CPG brands?
None of them publish a revenue minimum, so this is about fit rather than policy. iPullRank's own engagement tiers describe everything from start-ups to Fortune 500, though its published client roster skews toward enterprise retail, apparel, media and financial services, and it runs no CPG-specific practice page. NoGood lists its verticals as SaaS, B2B, healthcare, fintech, consumer and eCommerce, and AI, and the CPG clients it names are P&G, L'Oréal and Johnson & Johnson, which are enterprise scale. Profound's own FAQ suggests that teams larger than three people belong on a custom enterprise plan. Shelf Help AI works exclusively with consumer brands in the $5M to $500M range.
What about AthenaHQ, Scrunch AI, and Otterly.ai?
All three are monitoring platforms in the same category as Profound and all three are worth looking at. AthenaHQ publishes a free tier and a $295 per month Starter plan, and it has the most developed consumer-goods product surface of the platforms we reviewed. Scrunch AI publishes the most transparent pricing of the group at $250 per month billed annually or $300 month to month, with a seven-day trial and no credit card required. Otterly.ai starts at $29 per month, though Claude, Gemini and Google AI Mode are paid add-ons at every tier, so compare total cost rather than the headline. A fuller breakdown is in our guide to choosing a provider.
Why should I trust a comparison written by one of the options?
You should not trust it uncritically, and we would rather say that than pretend otherwise. What we can do is make it checkable: every competitor figure on this page is quoted verbatim from that company's own published pages as of August 2026, with the source named, and where a company does not publish something we say so rather than filling the gap. We have also named three specific areas where each competitor is better than us. Verify the quotes, and weigh the rest accordingly.
Find out if you need any of us.
The free AI Shelf Snapshot runs five buyer-style prompts for your category and sends back a one-page scorecard in two business days. No call, no card, no obligation to buy anything from anyone.
Get Your Free SnapshotStill comparing? Read the buyer's guide →