Of the seven agencies here, two publish a price and five do not. Two publish how many queries they track. Two publish a named client result. One publishes a dataset with a stated sample size. Those counts describe what is written on seven websites on 9 August 2026, and nothing more. A blank cell means we did not find it published, not that the agency does not do it.
What exactly is being compared?
Disclosure, not quality. Each cell records whether a specific fact is published on the agency's own site, quoting or summarising what is there and linking to the page. No cell contains an opinion about anyone's work, a review, a client interview, or anything an AI model said about them.
There is a reason to compare it this way rather than by ranking. A ranking of agencies you have not audited is a guess with a table around it. What can be checked, by anyone, in about twenty minutes, is what each firm is willing to put in writing before you call them. That is a narrow thing to measure. It is also the only thing on this page that a reader can verify without taking our word for anything.
The list of firms was not chosen by us. These are agencies that ChatGPT or Perplexity named when we asked 16 dental agency-hiring questions across two runs each, described in full in who AI engines recommend when a dentist asks for a GEO agency. Being named by an engine is why a firm is on this page. It is not evidence that the firm is good, and the study page says so at length.
"Not stated" means we opened the agency's own pages on 9 August 2026 and did not find that information there. It does not mean the agency does not do it, does not track it, or is hiding it. Many good firms give prices only on a call. Read every blank cell as a question to ask, never as an answer.
What does each agency publish about price, contract and cadence?
Two of the seven publish prices: Brux Dental Marketing at $97 to $597 a month, and Citevio at $1,400 to $5,500 a month plus a one-time setup fee. Six of the seven state contract terms, five of those month to month or no-contract, one at 6 or 12 months. Reporting cadence ranges from daily to monthly.
| Agency | Monthly price published | Contract terms published | Reporting cadence published |
|---|---|---|---|
| Citevio (us) | Yes. $1,400 / $2,900 / $5,500 per month, plus one-time setup of $1,900 / $3,500 / $7,500 | Month to month, "no lock-in and no notice period" | Daily |
| Brux Dental Marketing | Yes. $97 / $297 / $597 per month, plus a free tier | "No contracts, no minimum term" | Daily query runs stated; weekly audits on the middle plan |
| Vydhai Dental | Not stated | "no hostage contracts", no length given | "A live dashboard and weekly sprints" |
| DentalScapes | Not stated on the GEO or pricing page | "Flexible 6 or 12-month agreements" | "Monthly AI Visibility Reporting" |
| Kruxel | Not stated | "No long-term contracts" | "Monthly reporting tied to real search growth"; "Monthly tracking across major AI platforms" |
| Pleiades Consultancy | Not stated | Not stated | "Monthly reports" |
| Rank & Rejuvenate | Not stated | "Month to month", "no annual lock-in, no early-exit penalty" | Monthly: "Booked appointments by channel, reported monthly in your numbers" |
What does each agency publish about measurement and proof?
All seven name the AI surfaces they cover, from three up to six. Two publish how many queries they track. Two publish a named client result with numbers, both counted in patient calls rather than AI citations. One publishes a dataset with a stated sample size, and that one is us.
| Agency | AI surfaces named | Number of queries tracked | Named client result published | Research with a stated sample size |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Citevio (us) | 4: ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Google AI Overviews | Yes. 30 / 45 / 60 by plan | None published. Evidence is published as research instead, see the next column | Yes. 527 dental practices, 7 US metros, CC-BY-4.0 with a DOI |
| Brux Dental Marketing | 5 on the homepage: ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity, Grok. The pricing page lists 4 | Yes. About 17 auto-generated on the entry plan, "unlimited custom + auto" above it | Not on the pages we opened | Not stated |
| Vydhai Dental | 6: ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Perplexity, Google AI, Microsoft Copilot | Not stated | Not on the page we opened; a results page is linked and we did not open it | Not stated |
| DentalScapes | 5: ChatGPT, Gemini, Google AI, Claude, Meta AI | Not stated | One client testimonial, no figures with it | Not stated. Percentage claims appear without a sample size |
| Kruxel | 4: ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Google AI | Not stated | Yes. Two named clients with patient-call and case-volume figures, not AI citation figures | Not stated |
| Pleiades Consultancy | 4: ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, Google AI Overviews | Not stated | Yes. A practice shown with 53 new patient calls in 14 days, described as a 463% increase | Not stated. A 97% figure is published with no sample size on the page |
| Rank & Rejuvenate | 3: ChatGPT, Gemini, Google AI Overviews | Not stated | Not on the page we opened | A 2026 report is linked; we did not open it, so no sample size is recorded here |
Where does Citevio not lead in this table?
Two columns. On surfaces named, Citevio covers four while Vydhai Dental names six and both DentalScapes and Brux name five, so Citevio does not have the widest coverage. On published proof, Kruxel and Pleiades show named client results counted in patient calls, and Citevio publishes no named client case study.
On surfaces, four is a deliberate number rather than a ceiling. Citevio tracks ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini and Google AI Overviews because those four can be measured and reported the same way every month; a surface added to a homepage but not to a monthly report is a longer list, not more information.
On proof, the two kinds of evidence in this table answer different questions. A named client result is one practice's outcome, reported by the agency that produced it, with no way for a reader to re-run it. A dataset with a stated sample size is a method anyone can check: an open dataset of 527 dental practices released under CC-BY-4.0 with a DOI, and a study of which agencies AI assistants name, published down to the answer-level CSV. In the research column above, one row of seven says yes. A buyer is entitled to ask for both kinds.
On price, the two published figures in this table are not comparable products. Brux publishes $97 a month for monitoring software you run yourself; Citevio publishes $1,400 a month plus setup for a retainer where the work is done for you. Both numbers are on the page rather than behind a call, which is the only thing this column measures, and anyone comparing them should see the gap stated plainly rather than buried. What is and is not included in our own figure is written out in what GEO for a dental clinic costs.
Why is Firegang missing from the table?
Because we could not read its website. firegang.com returned HTTP 403 Forbidden to our requests on 7 August 2026 and again on 9 August 2026. With no page available to quote, any row we wrote would be invention, so the row is left out and the reason is printed here.
This is worth saying out loud because Firegang led both of ChatGPT's answers to one question in our study, "best GEO agency for dental practices in 2026". That both runs named it is recorded in the study's answer-level CSV; that it came first is from the answer text, which we do not publish. Its absence from this table is a limitation of our method, not a signal about the firm. A 403 usually means a server is refusing automated requests, which is a normal thing for a site to do and says nothing about the business behind it.
How should a practice owner actually use this?
As a list of questions, not as a scoreboard. Take the four columns where most cells read "not stated", ask those four questions on your first call with any agency, and write down the answers. An agency that answers them clearly on a call is doing the same thing the two published columns do, just later.
- What does it cost, in total, including setup? Five of seven do not publish this. Ask for the monthly figure and the one-time figure separately.
- How many questions will you track for me, and who picks them? Five of seven do not publish a number. A tracked set of unknown size cannot be compared month to month.
- How often is the data refreshed? The published answers here range from daily to monthly. In our own two-run study, ChatGPT's source list overlapped only 29% between two runs a day apart, so a monthly reading and a daily one are not measuring the same thing.
- Can you show a client whose AI citations changed, with the before and after? Nobody in this table publishes that, us included. Patient-call figures are useful, and they are a different claim.
- What can you not do? No agency can guarantee that an AI engine will name a practice, and Citevio does not offer one either; what it does offer is financial — the 45-day citation guarantee refunds the setup fee if you have not been named by at least two of the four engines in an agreed question within that window. AI placement cannot be bought; there is no paid slot in an AI recommendation. An agency unwilling to say that out loud is worth a second look.
On the third question, some scale from outside our own data. SOCi's 2026 local visibility index reported that ChatGPT recommended 1.2% of the locations it studied, Perplexity 7.4% and Gemini 11%. Being named on these surfaces is rare, which is exactly why the measurement design matters more than the promise.
Source: SOCi 2026 Local Visibility Index, reported by Search Engine Land, January 2026.
And a note on how fast this page ages. Profound found roughly 40 to 60% of the domains cited in AI answers changed within a month for identical prompts. Agency websites move at their own pace on top of that: one row in the table above read differently when we first checked it two days earlier. Every cell is dated for that reason. Our own measurement method, including how we decide when a change counts as real, is in how we measure AI visibility.
Source: Profound, July 2025.
Before you call anyone, it is worth knowing what the engines currently say about your own practice.
Prefer a deeper look? The full AI visibility checker for dentists tests what ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini and Google AI Overviews actually say about you.
Common questions
Does a blank cell mean the agency does not do that thing?
No, and this is the most important rule on the page. Not stated means we opened the agency's own pages on 9 August 2026 and did not find that information published there. Plenty of agencies do work they never write down, and several of these publish prices only after a call. Treat a blank cell as a question to ask on that call, not as a fact about the service.
Why is Firegang not in this comparison?
Because we could not read its site. firegang.com returned HTTP 403 Forbidden to our requests on 7 August 2026 and again on 9 August 2026, so no page was available to quote. Writing a row for an agency whose site we could not open would mean guessing, so Firegang is left out and the reason is stated here.
Which agency in this table is the cheapest?
Brux Dental Marketing, by a wide margin. Its pricing page lists $97, $297 and $597 per month. Citevio's published plans start at $1,400 per month plus a one-time setup fee. Those are different products at different scales, self-serve monitoring software against a done-for-you agency retainer, but on published price alone Brux is the lowest and Citevio is not.
Where does Citevio not lead in this table?
Two columns. On surfaces named, Citevio covers four while Vydhai Dental names six, DentalScapes five and Brux five, so Citevio does not have the widest coverage; it tracks the four surfaces it can measure and report every month. On published proof, Kruxel and Pleiades Consultancy show named client results counted in patient calls, and Citevio publishes no named client case study. What Citevio publishes instead is research with a stated sample size — an open dataset of 527 dental practices under CC-BY-4.0 with a DOI — which no other agency in the table publishes.
How often does this comparison go out of date?
Quickly. Agency websites change without notice, and one row in this table read differently when we first checked it two days earlier. That is why every cell carries the date it was read rather than a bare yes or no. If you are making a decision on any single cell, open the linked page and check it yourself before you act.