Skip to main content

At a glance

  • Dataminr scores 3.8/5 and Profound scores 2.5/5 in Benchmark Grid's independent media monitoring & AI visibility tools benchmark, both assessed on the same 10 criteria.
  • The widest gaps are ai answer & llm citation tracking (Dataminr 2.5, Profound 4.8) and real-time alerting (Dataminr 4.8, Profound 2.8); they are within 0.3 on 3 of 10 criteria.
  • Dataminr is built for enterprise publishers; Profound for mid-market and enterprise.
  • On total cost of ownership Dataminr scores 2.5 and Profound 2.1 (higher means better value, not a lower price).
  • In our tracking 5 publishers use Dataminr and 0 use Profound.
  • Scores last verified 11 Nov 2026. Vendors cannot pay for a score or a position.

Where they differ

Dataminr is stronger on real-time alerting (4.8 vs 2.8) and source coverage (4.6 vs 3.2).

Profound is stronger on AI answer & LLM citation tracking (4.8 vs 2.5) and share of voice & competitive benchmarking (4.5 vs 3.2).

Which one fits

Choose Dataminr if…

  • You publish at enterprise scale.
  • You weight real-time alerting and source coverage heavily — Dataminr leads on those in this benchmark.

Choose Profound if…

  • You publish at mid-market and enterprise scale.
  • You weight AI answer & LLM citation tracking, share of voice & competitive benchmarking and sentiment & portrayal analysis heavily — Profound leads on those in this benchmark.

Also weighing these

The nearest-scored tools to Dataminr and Profound in this benchmark, listed A to Z.

All 16 scored tools are in Best Media Monitoring & AI Visibility Tools.

Who uses them

Publishers we have detected running each tool, from ads.txt, site code and published case studies. Agencies, brands and vendors are excluded.

Profound · 0

No publisher adoption verified yet.

Head to head

CriterionDataminrProfound
Source coverage14% of capability4.63.2
Accuracy & relevance filtering12% of capability4.24.2
AI answer & LLM citation tracking12% of capability2.54.8
Content licensing & data compliance10% of capability3.63.6
Reporting & dashboards10% of capability3.54.0
Share of voice & competitive benchmarking10% of capability3.24.5
Integrations & export8% of capability3.83.8
Real-time alerting8% of capability4.82.8
Sentiment & portrayal analysis8% of capability2.63.8
Usability8% of capability2.83.8
Capability45% of composite3.63.9
Publisher fit40% of composite4.51.0
Total cost of ownership15% of composite2.52.1

Cost of ownership

Sub-scoreDataminrProfound
Pricing transparency1.61.0
Entry cost1.61.0
Implementation cost2.31.5
Hidden-fee risk4.73.0
Ongoing cost2.34.0

Dataminr pricing

Custom enterprise pricing only; reports indicate annual contracts typically range from $20,000 for small teams to $100,000+ for global organizations.

Profound pricing

Custom; agency and enterprise plans

What users say

Dataminr

7 positive · 8 neutral · 4 negative

Profound

9 positive · 3 neutral · 0 negative

Mentions we could not tie to a real user, and those flagged as promotional, are excluded. Sentiment is opinion, and is independent of the verified publisher adoptions above.

Dataminr scores 3.8 and Profound scores 2.5 in Benchmark Grid's independent Best Media Monitoring & AI Visibility Tools benchmark (benchmarkgrid.com/vs/dataminr/profound, verified Nov 11, 2026)

Common questions

How do Dataminr and Profound differ?

Dataminr is stronger on real-time alerting (4.8 vs 2.8) and source coverage (4.6 vs 3.2). Profound is stronger on AI answer & LLM citation tracking (4.8 vs 2.5) and share of voice & competitive benchmarking (4.5 vs 3.2). Neither is better in the abstract — which one suits you depends on which of those dimensions carries the most weight in your operation.

Which is cheaper, Dataminr or Profound?

On total cost of ownership — pricing transparency, entry cost, implementation, hidden-fee risk and ongoing cost — Dataminr scores 2.5/5 and Profound scores 2.1/5. A higher score means better value, not a lower sticker price.

How are these scores calculated?

Each tool is assessed against its category's published criteria (10 in this benchmark), which make up Capability (45% of the composite), Publisher fit (40%) and Total cost of ownership (15%). Assessment is carried out by SODP's editorial team against a published methodology. Vendors cannot pay for inclusion, scores or positions.

Share:

Both tools are scored in Best Media Monitoring & AI Visibility Tools. See alternatives to Dataminr or alternatives to Profound.

Weighing a third option? Add a tool to this comparison.

Related comparisons

Other head-to-heads publishers look at in Best Media Monitoring & AI Visibility Tools.

Find Better AlternativesWhich alternative media monitoring tools are best for smalle...