Measurement has real, recurring API cost. We meter on the two things that drive it — pages under management and tracked prompts — instead of an article count that means nothing.
Prove it works before you pay.
One site, measured properly.
Cheaper than blogbuster's top tier — with a measurement product it doesn't have.
Write, publish, measure — proven.
Same price as Writesonic Basic, with 40 articles instead of 25 — plus attribution they gate to Enterprise.
Serious content operations.
Profound's Growth tier is 9,000 responses across 3 engines with no content generation, for $399.
Your first few retained clients.
$60 per client, wholesale.
At 15 clients that's $60/client/month wholesale against a typical $350 retainer.
A full client book, under one login.
Undercuts Slate's agency tier with twice the pages under management.
All plans bill monthly and cancel any time. Overages are never charged silently: every plan has a fixed monthly API ceiling, reserved before each job rather than counted afterwards, and work stops at the ceiling instead of arriving as a surprise line on your bill.
Free accounts, and trials until their first payment, draw their model work from one shared monthly allowance as well as their own ceiling. When that allowance is spent, writing and sampling pause for every unpaid account until 00:00 UTC on the 1st; Search Console gathering and everything already published are not affected. A paid subscription is never part of it.
The engine count above is a ceiling, not a guarantee: an engine is sampled only once its key is configured on this deployment, so what a plan permits and what it actually samples can differ. Claude, with live web search, is always sampled; the rest come online as their key and adapter are configured. We do not print today's number on this page — a sentence here cannot know how the deployment is configured, and one that still says "one engine" the day a second is switched on has quietly become a false price. The free check names the engines this deployment can sample right now, and every report names the engines that actually answered, not the number a plan advertises.
Maintaining a page that already ranks is the highest-return content work available in 2026. Metering on pages means the price tracks the asset you're protecting.
Every prompt is sampled repeatedly, on a schedule. That is a real, recurring API cost — roughly 3¢ per sampled answer — so it has to be metered honestly.
An article count rewards volume, and volume is exactly what stopped working. We'd rather sell you fewer, better pieces and the evidence that they moved something.
No, and be wary of anyone who does. Ranking depends on your authority, your competitors and algorithm changes nobody controls. What we guarantee is measurement you can defend: honest sampling, stated intervals, and every change tied to what happened next.
Google's policy targets scaled, low-quality content — not AI as a method. The sites that got hit share a fingerprint: low authority, high volume, no editorial review. Penlid is built the other way round: majority refresh of existing pages, commercial-intent content over generic volume, fact-check records, and a review workflow that makes human sign-off actually happen. Volume is bounded by your plan's monthly article ceiling — the number on the card above — and by one live article per target page, so a page cannot be refreshed twice at once. There is no hidden drip beyond those two: what paces publishing is a person approving each draft.
You keep everything published — it's on your CMS, not ours. Your history and attribution ledger stay readable in the app after cancelling: writing stops, reading does not, because the archive is the thing you were paying for.
Only if you want Penlid to publish for you. Credentials are encrypted at rest and scoped to a single site. A destination set to draft mode — a WordPress draft, a commit to a drafts branch, or a copy kept in Penlid — never puts anything public; only a destination set to publish does. Search Console access is read-only.