Evertune vs Seenby

Two different shapes of purchase sit behind this search, and it helps to name them before the table.

Seenby is a weekly tracker for a single brand. You give it a brand name and description and up to three competitor names, and a set of 50 to 100 prompts is frozen at setup. That same frozen set runs every week against two answer providers, OpenAI and Perplexity, so the trend measures the market rather than a changing list of questions. The output is one headline number per brand per week, Share of AI Voice, stored with its methodology caveat attached to every computed record.

One fact belongs at the top rather than in a footnote. Seenby is not open yet. The site is a waitlist, so everything below describes what the product is built to do and what it will cost, not something you can buy this afternoon. If your decision has to close this quarter, that is probably the line that decides it, and you should read the rest with it in mind.

Evertune is the other name on your shortlist, and we are not going to characterise their product for you. The research we hold on Evertune is recalled, not retrieved: no quote, no retrieval date, nothing we would publish as fact about another company's work. So the third column below mostly reads ask Evertune. That is less satisfying than a tidy feature grid. It is also the only version of this page we can stand behind, and it tells you something about how we handle numbers we cannot show our working for.

Read Evertune's own material at evertune.ai, then hold it against the second column, which is ours to answer for.

Most of the second column is scope. Three rows are the argument.

One score, per brand, per week

Share of AI Voice is computed as a single headline metric for your brand each week. It is not a live gauge and it is not a ranking. It is a weekly reading taken from a fixed prompt set, which is the only way a week-over-week line means anything. A score computed from different questions each time measures your questions, not your market.

The caveat travels with the number

Every computed score record carries its methodology caveat text, and the methodology is disclosed in-product on every score display as well as on a dedicated static page. We do this because the honest description of this category includes a limitation: model outputs are not deterministic, and a movement of a few points may be noise rather than news. You should expect that stated next to the number, not buried in a help centre. If a tool you are evaluating shows you a score without showing you how it was produced, ask.

Model-version tagging

Every stored response is tagged with the model version that produced it. This is the answer to the objection practitioners raise first, that the results change every time you ask. Tagging does not make the underlying answers stable. It does let a drop be examined against the possibility that the provider shipped a new model version that week, which is the difference between a real competitive shift and a measurement artefact.

Being fair here is easy, because the boundary is a matter of scope rather than quality.

Seenby fits when

You have one brand to defend and a named competitive set you can count on one hand. You want a price you can read before you talk to anyone, and you are willing to wait for an invitation rather than open a procurement cycle now. You report monthly or quarterly and need a weekly line, a sentiment breakdown and the actual answers to quote in the deck when someone asks how ChatGPT describes you. You are comfortable with two providers, OpenAI and Perplexity, covered properly rather than a longer list covered thinly. And you would rather have the caveat printed next to the number than a confident chart.

Evertune, or another vendor, fits when

Several things are genuinely outside what Seenby does, and if any of them is a requirement then Seenby is the wrong tool and you should evaluate the alternatives on their merits. Timing comes first: Seenby is a waitlist today, so a need you have to serve this month is a need it cannot serve. Seenby tracks one brand per subscription, so a portfolio of brands or a roster of clients does not fit in one seat. It names up to three competitors, so a wide category map is out of range. It queries two providers, so if your buyers live in Gemini or Claude, that coverage is not here. It has no independent security certification, no single sign-on, no data processing agreement on request and no self-serve export, which several mid-market and most enterprise procurement processes will treat as a hard stop. If your evaluation is being run by a security reviewer rather than a marketer, start there.

If you are an agency weighing this for client work, the one brand per subscription limit shapes the whole decision, and the agencies page sets out how that plays out in practice.