Key Takeaways
- Gumshoe AI uses pay-per-report pricing ($0.10/conversation) while Briljant charges €49/month flat -- if you run fewer than 490 reports monthly, Gumshoe is cheaper
- Briljant tests 3,000 prompts per month automatically; Gumshoe requires you to manually configure and run each report
- Briljant is built specifically for Dutch businesses with localized support and GDPR compliance, while Gumshoe AI targets a global English-speaking audience
- Both track ChatGPT and Perplexity, but Briljant adds Google AI (Gemini) while Gumshoe includes standard Gemini -- coverage is similar but not identical
- Gumshoe offers AI-assisted content generation in its paid tier; Briljant focuses purely on monitoring and technical optimization
- Neither platform provides the depth of Promptwatch -- if you need content gap analysis, crawler logs, or Reddit/YouTube tracking alongside visibility monitoring, that's a different category of tool
Overview
Gumshoe AI
Gumshoe AI positions itself as a straightforward brand monitoring tool for AI search. You define personas, topics, and competitors, then run reports to see how often your brand gets mentioned in responses from ChatGPT, Gemini, and Perplexity. The core value is simplicity: pay only when you run a report, no monthly commitment. It includes competitive benchmarking and shows which sources AI models cite when they mention your brand.
The platform targets marketers and brand managers who want quick visibility checks without committing to a full monitoring subscription. Three free reports let you test the waters, then you pay $0.10 per conversation after that. Scheduled reports and trend tracking unlock once you're on the paid tier.
Briljant
Briljant is a Dutch GEO platform that runs 3,000 prompts monthly to track your brand's visibility in ChatGPT, Google AI, and Perplexity. It's designed for businesses and agencies in the Netherlands who want continuous monitoring rather than on-demand checks. The platform includes technical audits to help you improve AI discoverability -- things like structured data, content gaps, and crawlability issues.
Pricing is flat: €49/month (€399/year) after a 7-day free trial. You get all 3,000 prompts, competitor comparisons, and AI analytics dashboards. The focus is on European markets with GDPR compliance and localized support. Over 300 Dutch companies use it, including recognizable brands like Domino's and Easytoys.
Side-by-side comparison
| Feature | Gumshoe AI | Briljant |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing model | Pay-per-report ($0.10/conversation) | Flat monthly (€49/mo or €399/yr) |
| Free tier | 3 reports | 7-day trial |
| Prompts tested | Manual (you configure each) | 3,000/month automatic |
| AI models tracked | ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity | ChatGPT, Google AI, Perplexity |
| Persona tracking | Yes | Yes |
| Competitor benchmarking | Yes | Yes |
| Content generation | AI-assisted (paid tier) | No |
| Technical audits | No | Yes (GEO optimizer) |
| Scheduled reports | Yes (paid tier) | Yes |
| Language/region focus | Global (English) | Dutch/European markets |
| GDPR compliance | Not specified | Yes |
| API access | Not mentioned | Not mentioned |
Pricing breakdown
The pricing models are fundamentally different, which makes this comparison interesting.
| Plan | Gumshoe AI | Briljant |
|---|---|---|
| Free/Trial | 3 reports (forever) | 7-day trial |
| Starter | $0.10 per conversation | €49/month (€399/year) |
| What you get | Pay only when you run reports | 3,000 prompts/month, all features |
| Break-even point | 490 reports/month = €49 | Unlimited reports for €49 |
| Enterprise | Custom pricing | Not offered |
If you're running fewer than 490 reports per month, Gumshoe is cheaper. If you need continuous monitoring with thousands of prompts, Briljant's flat rate makes more sense. The catch: Gumshoe requires manual effort to configure and run each report, while Briljant automates the whole process.
Feature deep-dive
Monitoring approach
Gumshoe AI is on-demand. You set up a report by defining your brand, competitors, topics, and personas, then hit "run." Each run costs $0.10 and generates a snapshot of how AI models are responding to those specific prompts at that moment. You control exactly what gets tested and when.
Briljant is continuous. It runs 3,000 prompts per month automatically, testing a broad set of queries relevant to your industry and brand. You don't configure individual reports -- the platform decides what to test based on your business category and competitive landscape. This is better for trend tracking but gives you less control over specific queries.
Verdict: Gumshoe for targeted spot-checks, Briljant for ongoing monitoring.
AI model coverage
Both platforms track the big three: ChatGPT, Perplexity, and some version of Google's AI. Gumshoe lists "Gemini" while Briljant specifies "Google AI" -- likely referring to the same underlying models but potentially different implementations (Gemini standalone vs Google AI Overviews). Neither platform tracks Claude, Meta AI, Grok, DeepSeek, or Mistral.
Gumshoe's website emphasizes "leading AI tools" but only names three. Briljant is upfront about covering ChatGPT, Google AI, and Perplexity. If you need broader LLM coverage, both fall short compared to platforms like Promptwatch that monitor 10+ models.
Verdict: Functionally similar coverage, both limited to 3 models.
Persona and topic tracking
Both platforms let you track visibility across different buyer personas and topic areas. Gumshoe calls this "persona visibility" and "topic visibility" -- you define who's asking (e.g. "small business owner") and what they're asking about (e.g. "project management tools"), then see how often your brand appears in those contexts.
Briljant offers the same concept but automates more of it. The platform suggests relevant personas and topics based on your industry, then tests them as part of the 3,000 monthly prompts. You can customize, but the default setup is designed to work out of the box.
Verdict: Gumshoe gives you more control, Briljant saves you setup time.
Competitive benchmarking
Both platforms show how you stack up against competitors. Gumshoe's "Competitive Rank" feature compares mention frequency across topics and models. Briljant's competitor comparison does the same thing with visual dashboards.
Neither platform offers the depth of competitive analysis you'd get from a full GEO platform -- things like which specific content pieces competitors are getting cited for, or what prompts they're winning that you're not. For that level of insight, you'd need something with content gap analysis.
Verdict: Tie -- both offer basic competitive benchmarking.
Content and optimization features
Gumshoe AI includes "AI-assisted content generation" in its paid tier. The website doesn't detail what this means, but it's positioned as a way to act on the visibility data you collect. Presumably, it suggests content topics or generates drafts based on where you're underperforming.
Briljant takes a different approach with its "GEO Optimizer" -- technical and content optimization recommendations. This focuses on making your existing website more discoverable to AI crawlers: structured data, internal linking, content formatting, crawlability issues. It's more about fixing technical problems than creating new content.
Verdict: Gumshoe for content creation, Briljant for technical SEO.
Reporting and analytics
Gumshoe provides per-report snapshots. You see mention frequency, cited sources, and competitive rankings for each report you run. Scheduled reports and trend tracking (comparing results over time) are available in the paid tier, but you're still looking at discrete data points rather than continuous streams.
Briljant offers real-time AI analytics dashboards. Because it's running 3,000 prompts monthly, you get trend lines showing how your visibility changes over weeks and months. The platform also tracks "AI-verkeer" (AI traffic) -- actual visitors coming from AI search engines, which requires adding a tracking snippet to your site.
Verdict: Briljant for ongoing analytics, Gumshoe for point-in-time checks.
Language and regional focus
Gumshoe AI is built for a global, English-speaking audience. The website and interface are in English, and there's no mention of multi-language support or regional customization.
Briljant is explicitly Dutch. The entire website is in Dutch, it's designed for businesses operating in the Netherlands, and it emphasizes GDPR compliance for European markets. If you're a Dutch company or agency, this localization is a big advantage. If you're not, it's a barrier.
Verdict: Gumshoe for international