SEO and marketing decision

AIRIX - AEO / AI Visibility Platform

A technical user can build a useful weekly-scanning workflow, but reproducing the hosted product’s ongoing engine coverage, scale, and continuous maintenance against changing AI platforms is operationally heavy, so full parity is unlikely without dedicated ops and monitoring.

Visit website
You pay

$39.99/mo

$480/yr

Read off the official pricing page.

You’d pay instead

$100one-off80 h to build

$50/mo6 h/mo upkeep

On cash alone, building overtakes the subscription at 2 seats.

No open-source build does this yet

Nothing published replaces this one, so a replacement starts from an empty file. Here is what it would have to cover.

What a replacement has to do

  • Run automated queries across multiple AI chat engines for a given business, collect & parse answers, compute per-engine visibility scores, generate remedial assets (llms.txt, schema, answer-shaped copy), and deliver a weekly brief/email.

What it still won’t have

  • Scale, reliability and SLAs for weekly scans
  • Continuous maintenance for new/changed AI engine UIs and proprietary APIs
  • Proprietary monitoring, model-updated optimisations, and marketing/brand of the hosted product
  • Multi-tenant billing, referral programs, and turnkey onboarding

What remains hard

  • Execution qualityWe build and maintain everything. You do nothing.
Read the build prompt

First-year cost

Keep paying

Paying is—cheaper in year one.

On cash alone, building overtakes the subscription at 2 seats.

Paid seatsseats

Money you would actually spend

Keep paying
—

Subscription price × seats × 12

Build it
—

AI build —APIs + hosting —

Time you would spend

—

—

What you would spend

What we assumed

The verdict above measures whether you could build it. This one is only about money.

Runnable build prompt

Not run yet
Build a self-hosted AIRIX-lite using Node.js + Playwright, Postgres, Next.js, and a hosted SMTP (SendGrid). Core features in scope: 1) scheduled weekly scan job that runs two prompts per configured AI engine (implement drives via Playwright to capture answers for engines without public APIs), 2) normalize and store raw answers and per-engine visibility results in Postgres, 3) extractor microservice (Node.js) that identifies company mentions and competitor names and computes a 0–100 weekly visibility score, 4) generator that produces llms.txt and answer-shaped copy using an LLM (OpenAI/other) for templating, 5) generate a weekly brief HTML and send via email, 6) a minimal Next.js dashboard to view last scan and trigger on-demand scans. Out of scope: multi-tenant billing, ads tracker, integrated competitor scanning across proprietary data sources, analytics beyond basic scoring. Require error handling, retries for scraping, tests for the extractor/score logic, and CI that deploys to a small VPS (DigitalOcean) with managed Postgres and a scheduled worker (e.g., systemd or cron).
How we checked2 sources · 3/3 runs agreed · evidence score 60

How the score was reached

  • Partly verdict base52
  • 2 cited sources+1
  • Price verified on pricing page+3
  • 3/3 assessment runs agreed+4
  • Evidence score60

The base comes from the verdict. Everything under it is a check that either happened or did not, and each one is a fact frozen in this record rather than a judgement made at render time - so the same evidence always produces the same number.

How scoring works →

Cited sources · 2

Every page the run actually retrieved.

Integrity checks

What held up, and what did not.

✓ Price read off the page✓ 3 independent runs, one answer✓ Citations limited to fetched pages! 1 moat quoted from the page