Comparison
Cited Monitor vs LLM Pulse
Both tools monitor your brand across AI models. The difference is in how they're built and what you pay.
| Cited Monitor | LLM Pulse | |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing model | Flat monthly fee + your API costs | Per-prompt pricing (from £45/mo) |
| API keys | Bring your own (BYOK) | Uses their keys |
| Cost per run | ~$0.003 (provider rate) | Included in per-prompt price |
| Models | 13+ across 6 providers | 14+ models |
| REST API | Yes | Yes |
| Webhooks | Yes | No |
| GEO/content tools | No — focused on monitoring | Yes (GEO Writer, GEO Testing) |
| Focus | Monitoring & data | All-in-one platform |
When to choose Cited Monitor
You want transparent costs. With BYOK, you pay LLM providers directly at their published rates. No per-prompt markup. You know exactly what each run costs.
You want API access and webhooks. Cited Monitor is built developer-first. Pull data into your own tools, trigger actions on events, build custom reporting.
You want monitoring, not a content suite. If you don't need GEO writing tools and content optimisation built in, you don't need to pay for them. Cited Monitor does monitoring well and stays out of your way.
When LLM Pulse might be better
If you want a single platform that includes content optimisation tools (GEO Writer, A/B testing), crawler analytics, and AI ad tracking alongside monitoring, LLM Pulse bundles all of that together.
Try Cited Monitor free
14-day trial. No credit card. Your own API keys.