CitedSpy
Track your brand in ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity and More
86 followers
Track your brand in ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity and More
86 followers
CitedSpy helps brands track and improve their visibility in AI search. Monitor how often your company is mentioned, cited, and recommended across ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Perplexity, and other AI assistants. Discover citation gaps, benchmark competitors, and optimize your Generative Engine Optimization (GEO) strategy so your brand gets recommended when buyers ask AI for solutions.
Free Options
Launch Team / Built With
AWS Startup AdvisorPersonalized AWS guidance that meets you where you’re already building
Promoted
I'm Arshita, founder of CitedSpy.
A few months ago, I asked ChatGPT for the best tools in a category we were serving. Our company wasn't mentioned. That sent me down a rabbit hole.
I realized buyers are no longer discovering products only through Google. They're asking ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and Perplexity. Yet most brands have no idea what AI is saying about them, who gets recommended, or which sources influence those recommendations.
So we built CitedSpy.
CitedSpy helps brands track their visibility across AI search engines, monitor citations and sentiment, benchmark competitors, and understand how they appear in AI-generated answers.
We're excited to launch today and would love your feedback.
What's the most surprising thing you've seen an AI assistant say about your brand or industry? 👇
— Arshita Sharma, Founder @ CitedSpy 🚀
Quick note on how we got here.
In the days before this launch, we received tens of DMs offering paid upvotes, "500k+ audience" promotions, and guaranteed top 3 placements for a fee.
We turned all of them down.
CitedSpy exists to show brands how they're genuinely mentioned and recommended by AI engines. It would be strange to launch a product about authentic visibility on top of purchased visibility.
So every upvote here is a real person. If you're one of them, thank you. And if you have honest feedback, critical or kind, we want that even more than the upvote.
- Arshita & the CitedSpy team
@arshita_sharma Congratulations on the launch! Always good to go the organic way on Product Hunt.
@arshita_sharma Congrats on the launch, Arshita! Showing up correctly in ChatGPT/Perplexity is fast becoming as important as ranking on Google, so it's great to see real measurement for it. One question: how do you handle LLM answer volatility — the same prompt citing different sources run-to-run? Excited to see where you take this. 🚀
The note about turning down paid upvotes is honestly one of the strongest parts of this launch. building a product around authentic visibility, then refusing to manufacture that visibility on PH, makes the positioning much easier to trust :)
I've been thinking more about AI discoverability while building a product and its documentation, and the hardest part seems to be separating real visibility trends from normal answer variation. Curious how CitedSpy handles that across different models, prompts, locations, and repeated runs, and how it decides when a citation gap is actually meaningful enough to act on.
@andrasczeizel Thank you, that means a lot. We felt it would be contradictory to build for authentic AI visibility while trying to game Product Hunt.
You’re also pointing at one of the hardest problems in this space. AI responses naturally vary across models, prompts, locations, and even repeated runs. So instead of treating a single response as truth, we look at visibility as a distribution over time across multiple models and prompt variations and focus on consistent patterns rather than one-off mentions.
That’s how we start separating normal variance from signals that are actually actionable (like persistent citation gaps or missed intent clusters).
We’re still refining this methodology as models evolve, so perspectives like yours are genuinely helpful in shaping how this should work.
Being able to see the exact prompts that led to a mention would be a game changer, even if it's a sampled view. That way we could reverse engineer which question phrasings actually surface our brand versus the ones where we're invisible.
@egemenucaf That's exactly the direction we're building towards.
Our goal is to show not just that your brand was mentioned, but also the prompts, context, and sources that influenced those AI responses. We want teams to understand why they were cited (or missed) so they can improve their AI visibility with confidence.
We're actively working on this, and feedback like yours helps us prioritize the roadmap. Thanks for the suggestion! 🚀
Congrats on the launch! Does it actually track based on different locations? I know a few brands and a few prompts that respond differently in each location, like the same prompt responds differently in the USA and India. Does your product support this?
@pratikkinage Yes! We support location-based tracking. AI responses vary significantly by region for example, the same prompt can produce different recommendations in the US vs. India because the competitive landscape and local context are different. CitedSpy tracks visibility separately by location, so you can see how your brand is cited, which competitors appear in each market, and optimize accordingly.
this is a category that's going to matter a lot more soon. how do you actually query the models - real API calls on some schedule, or sampling? asking because ChatGPT/Claude/Perplexity answers aren't deterministic, so I'd guess you need a decent sample size per prompt before the citation rate number means anything
@galdayan Great question. We use real API calls on a scheduled basis (daily or twice a week, depending on the plan), not static datasets.
You're also right that LLM responses aren't deterministic. That's why we don't rely on a single response—we're continuously improving our sampling and scoring methodology to make AI visibility trends and citation insights as reliable and actionable as possible over time.
the measurement part makes sense, but I'm stuck on the action part - once you know your citation rate is low, what's the actual lever to pull? unlike classic SEO there's no sitemap to submit to an LLM, so is the fix really just "publish more content and hope it gets into the training/retrieval data", or is there something more direct you can do?
@omri_ben_shoham1 That's probably the question everyone in GEO is trying to answer. 😄
There isn't a "Submit to ChatGPT" button, just like there wasn't a magic SEO button in the early days.
The levers are about improving the signals AI systems rely on building topical authority, earning credible citations, getting mentioned in trusted sources, publishing content that directly answers user intent, and making your site easy for AI crawlers and retrieval systems to understand.
The difference is that CitedSpy doesn't stop at saying "your visibility is low." We try to pinpoint why which competitors are being cited instead, which sources are influencing the answers, and which topics or entities you're missing so you have a concrete place to start rather than guessing.
The models will keep evolving, but our goal is to help brands adapt to those changes instead of chasing them.
How stable are these rankings ? If I found out my competitor is recommended more often, what can I do to improve that ?
@reda_roqai_chaoui there is the opportunities section and you need to take those actions, mentioned in opportunities... you will start observing improvements over your own AI visibility.