MarketHQ Review: SEO Agents, AI Visibility and Trial Costs

Short answer

MarketHQ is a candidate for a small marketing team that wants monitored conversations and search opportunities turned into a review queue. Its scope is broader than a citation dashboard. Value depends on whether the team can act on the useful drafts, not on how many mentions the service collects.

Evidence and scope

This review follows submission #537. We checked the product, pricing and privacy policy on November 4, 2026. We did not start a trial, connect an assistant, verify source coverage or post a reply. Ratings are withheld. No affiliate destination is configured.

Five agents and a separate publishing step

The site describes Scout, Reply, SEO, Outreach and AI Visibility agents. They gather opportunities and draft work; the FAQ says you or your connected AI posts. The SEO workflow includes briefs and follow-up ranking checks. MCP is available on paid plans with read or write keys.

A draft pipeline needs an owner. Assign someone to reject irrelevant threads and confirm whether a proposed reply adds information. A tool surfacing a public discussion is not a reason to insert a promotion. Check community rules and disclose your relationship when contributing.

Pricing and a trial caveat

Lite is $29 monthly, Startup $99 and Growth $199; Enterprise starts at $499 with negotiated terms. Lite lists ten weekly AI questions and ten SEO briefs monthly. Startup lists 60 questions and 30 briefs; Growth lists 120 and 100. Every plan needs a card. The detailed pricing page gives Lite and Startup four-day trials charged on day four, while Growth charges at signup. This is more specific than the homepage’s broad trial wording. There is no continuing free plan; a one-time free check is separate.

Choose capacity around work you can review. If ten briefs already exceed editorial time, a larger tier may solve the wrong constraint. Confirm total billing, trial end and cancellation status before continuing. We did not inspect checkout.

Proposed relevance test

Pick one business, two competitors and a small set of unambiguous keywords. Manually label a sample of surfaced conversations as relevant, ambiguous or irrelevant. Check whether each suggested action points back to an accessible source. Keep missed conversations in a separate log if you already know of them.

For one SEO brief, inspect the existing page inventory and decide whether the work belongs on an established URL. For one reply, verify the facts and remove claims the business cannot substantiate. Time review and correction effort beside the manual process. This is a suggested pilot, not a measured result.

Data, assistant keys and outcomes

The privacy policy describes public-community monitoring and retained workspace terms; public mentions can include handles. That does not make a collected mention a qualified lead. Avoid placing customer secrets into search terms or drafts during the pilot.

Use read-only assistant access until the work queue is understood. A write permission to log an outcome is distinct from permission to publish through another connected service. Check both before enabling unattended actions.

Verdict

Evaluate MarketHQ when both listening and editorial follow-through are real needs. Choose a narrower tracker if your job is only to inspect citations. Compare ShareOfAsk and Lanesra, then use the brief review checklist before accepting content. See the MarketHQ profile for the evidence summary.