DEV Community: geobuddy

The AI Engines Disagree by 12.2 Points: 30 Consumer Electronics & Mobile Brands Measured

geobuddy — Sat, 03 Oct 2026 05:42:58 +0000

We asked 4 AI engines — ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini — the questions buyers actually type, about 30 Consumer electronics & mobile brands, on 2026-10-03. That is 360 answers. The engines did not agree: 12.2 percentage points separate the most and least generous of them.

Every figure below comes from those answers, and the query to re-run them is at the bottom of this page.

Which engine actually names brands?

Not equally. Gemini named a brand in 41.1% of its answers; Perplexity managed 28.9%. That is a 12.2-point gap between two engines asked identical questions on the same day, which is the whole argument for measuring more than one.

{"type":"bar","title":"Share of answers naming a brand, by engine (Consumer electronics & mobile)","unit":"%","data":[{"label":"Gemini","value":41.1},{"label":"Claude","value":37.8},{"label":"ChatGPT","value":36.7},{"label":"Perplexity","value":28.9}],"note":"360 answers measured 2026-10-03."}

Do the engines agree on who exists?

10 of the 30 brands were named by all 4 engines, and 10 were named by none of them (Crest, Divvy, Doing, Duoqin, Finderlock, Looq: Preview Files, Mispher, RepStandard, adsideō, fort). The rest sit in between, visible to some engines and invisible to others.

The widest split was Apple Reminders: Claude named it in 100% of the answers we asked about it, ChatGPT in 0%. That comparison rests on the handful of questions we asked about that one brand, not on the full sample — treat it as a lead to investigate, not a law.

{"type":"bar","title":"How many engines named each brand","data":[{"label":"4 of 4 engines","value":10,"emphasis":false},{"label":"3 of 4 engines","value":4,"emphasis":false},{"label":"2 of 4 engines","value":5,"emphasis":false},{"label":"1 of 4 engines","value":1,"emphasis":false},{"label":"0 of 4 engines","value":10,"emphasis":true}],"note":"Brands, out of 30 measured."}

Brand by brand, the disagreement is easier to see than to describe. These are the 15 brands the engines split hardest on — each cell is how often that engine named that brand.

{"type":"heatmap","title":"Which engine names which brand","unit":"%","cols":["ChatGPT","Claude","Gemini","Perplexity"],"rows":[{"label":"Apple Reminders","cells":[0,100,100,66.7]},{"label":"EveryDollar","cells":[66.7,66.7,66.7,0]},{"label":"Gaming services by IFTTT","cells":[66.7,0,66.7,0]},{"label":"Google Tasks","cells":[0,66.7,0,33.3]},{"label":"Nothing","cells":[0,66.7,66.7,33.3]},{"label":"Realme","cells":[33.3,66.7,0,0]},{"label":"Xiaomi","cells":[33.3,0,66.7,0]},{"label":"OnePlus","cells":[66.7,66.7,66.7,33.3]},{"label":"Apple","cells":[100,66.7,100,100]},{"label":"co/core","cells":[0,33.3,0,0]},{"label":"Google","cells":[100,66.7,100,66.7]},{"label":"Oppo","cells":[33.3,0,33.3,33.3]},{"label":"Samsung","cells":[100,66.7,100,100]},{"label":"Sensodyne","cells":[66.7,66.7,100,66.7]},{"label":"Sony","cells":[100,66.7,66.7,66.7]}],"note":"The 15 brands with the widest spread between engines, out of 30 measured."}

Named is not the same as recommended

A mention is not an endorsement. Of every mention in this study, 55.4% was the engine's first recommendation, while 40.8% was the brand being offered as an alternative to something else. A brand can look visible and still only ever appear as the runner-up.

{"type":"bar","title":"What role the brand played when an engine named it","unit":"%","data":[{"label":"recommended first","value":55.4,"emphasis":false},{"label":"offered as an alternative","value":40.8,"emphasis":true},{"label":"listed in a comparison","value":2.3,"emphasis":false},{"label":"mentioned in passing","value":1.5,"emphasis":false}],"note":"Share of all mentions in this study."}

5 brands were named but never recommended first by any engine: Google Tasks, Nothing, Oppo, Vivo, co/core. For those, visibility work is not the problem — positioning is.

What the engines actually said

Scores are a summary. These are the sentences themselves — one from each engine, about a different brand, exactly as written on 2026-10-03.

ChatGPT, on Adorama: "Adorama: A well-known retailer with a wide selection of photography gear, including cameras, lenses, and accessories."

Claude, on Apple Reminders: "Apple Reminders is the best free option on iOS. It's built-in, syncs with iCloud automatically, and has improved significantly with Smart Lists, Tags, and shared list features."

Gemini, on Apple: "For a premium, portable, and software-rich experience, the Apple iPad Pro is a strong choice."

Perplexity, on B&H Photo Video: "B&H Photo Video — A strong all-around option for cameras, lenses, lighting, support, audio, monitoring, and cinema gear."

The engines are not criticising you. They are omitting you.

Of the 130 mentions in this study, 121 were positive in tone and not one was negative. That is 93.1% positive. Reputation management is not the problem here: when an engine has something to say about a brand it is almost always kind, and when it has nothing to say it simply leaves the brand out. The gap to close is absence, not sentiment.

Which sources are the engines reading?

The engines cited youtube.com more than any other source (80 citations, 2.5% of all citations in this study). But the long tail is the real story: the top 10 domains together account for only 16.5% of citations. There is no short list of sites to get listed on — the engines are reading widely.

{"type":"bar","title":"Most-cited sources across every answer","data":[{"label":"youtube.com","value":80},{"label":"techradar.com","value":71},{"label":"cnet.com","value":65},{"label":"pcmag.com","value":57},{"label":"techadvisor.com","value":50},{"label":"tomsguide.com","value":49},{"label":"reddit.com","value":47},{"label":"androidauthority.com","value":38},{"label":"bgr.com","value":37},{"label":"nytimes.com","value":33}],"note":"Citations counted across 360 answers. \"Engines\" column below shows how many of the 4 cited each source."}

Source	Citations	Engines citing it
youtube.com	80	2 of 4
techradar.com	71	4 of 4
cnet.com	65	2 of 4
pcmag.com	57	2 of 4
techadvisor.com	50	3 of 4
tomsguide.com	49	4 of 4
reddit.com	47	2 of 4
androidauthority.com	38	3 of 4
bgr.com	37	4 of 4
nytimes.com	33	1 of 4

Who do the engines bring up instead?

These names were never in our sample — the engines volunteered them while answering about someone else. Belkin came up against 4 of the 30 brands we measured. If you are in this category, these are the brands you are being compared to whether you like it or not.

{"type":"bar","title":"Names the engines volunteered, by how many of our brands they appeared against","data":[{"label":"Belkin","value":4},{"label":"Baseus","value":4},{"label":"Honor","value":3},{"label":"Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra","value":3},{"label":"Google Pixel","value":3},{"label":"UGREEN","value":3},{"label":"TickTick","value":2},{"label":"Todoist","value":2},{"label":"Spigen","value":2},{"label":"Google Pixel 9 Pro","value":2}],"note":"Not part of the sample; named by the engines on their own."}

Every brand we measured

Visibility is the share of scored answers in which an engine named the brand. Apple led at 92%; RepStandard came last at 0%.

Brand	Visibility	Answers naming it
Apple	92%	11 of 12
Samsung	92%	11 of 12
YNAB (You Need A Budget)	92%	11 of 12
Google	83%	10 of 12
Sensodyne	75%	9 of 12
Sony	75%	9 of 12
Adorama	67%	8 of 12
Apple Reminders	67%	8 of 12
B&H Photo Video	67%	8 of 12
Motorola	67%	8 of 12
OnePlus	58%	7 of 12
EveryDollar	50%	6 of 12
Nothing	42%	5 of 12
Gaming services by IFTTT	33%	4 of 12
Google Tasks	25%	3 of 12
Oppo	25%	3 of 12
Realme	25%	3 of 12
Xiaomi	25%	3 of 12
Vivo	17%	2 of 12
co/core	8%	1 of 12
adsideō	0%	0 of 12
Crest	0%	0 of 12
Divvy	0%	0 of 12
Doing	0%	0 of 12
Duoqin	0%	0 of 12
Finderlock	0%	0 of 12
fort	0%	0 of 12
Looq: Preview Files	0%	0 of 12
Mispher	0%	0 of 12
RepStandard	0%	0 of 12

What to do with this

Measure every engine, not one. The spread between the most and least generous engine in this study was 12.2 points. A check against a single engine tells you about that engine.
Check the role, not just the mention. 40.8% of mentions here put the brand in the alternative slot. Moving from alternative to first recommendation is a positioning problem, not a visibility one.
Follow the citations, not the keyword list. The engines quoted a wide spread of sources here; youtube.com was the single most cited. Earning a place on the pages an engine already reads is what changes an answer.
Zero is a starting point, not a verdict. 10 of 30 brands scored zero here. The first mention on any engine is the milestone that proves the sources are being read.
Do not budget for reputation defence you do not need. 93.1% of mentions here were positive. Spend on being present, not on being liked.

What this does not show

Each brand was measured on the questions our generator writes for that brand, not on one shared question set, so this is an average of per-brand measurements and not a like-for-like ranking.
Per-brand splits between engines rest on the few questions asked about that brand, not on the full sample of 30.
These are measurements taken on 2026-10-03. AI answers change; a score here is a reading on that date, not a permanent property of the brand.

Reproduce this

The raw answers are stored per brand, per engine, per question. The figures above come from:

select "brandName", "stratum", "visibility", "mentionCount" from "StudyResult" where "studyId" = 'cmuqjbj13000nl904p08yu98d' order by "visibility" desc

Want the same measurement for your own brand? The free check runs this exact pipeline.

Originally published on GeoBuddy Blog.

Is your brand visible in AI answers? ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini & Perplexity are shaping how people discover products. Check your brand's AI visibility for free — 3 free checks, no signup required.

The AI Engines Keep Bringing Up Slack: 30 Communication, Email & Messaging Brands Measured

geobuddy — Thu, 01 Oct 2026 05:43:17 +0000

We asked 4 AI engines — ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini — the questions buyers actually type, about 30 Communication, email & messaging brands, on 2026-10-01. That is 360 answers. One name kept appearing that we never asked about: the engines volunteered Slack against 14 of the 30 brands we measured.

Every figure below comes from those answers, and the query to re-run them is at the bottom of this page.

Which engine actually names brands?

Not equally. Claude named a brand in 64.4% of its answers; Perplexity managed 58.9%. That is a 5.5-point gap between two engines asked identical questions on the same day, which is the whole argument for measuring more than one.

{"type":"bar","title":"Share of answers naming a brand, by engine (Communication, email & messaging)","unit":"%","data":[{"label":"Claude","value":64.4},{"label":"Gemini","value":61.1},{"label":"ChatGPT","value":60},{"label":"Perplexity","value":58.9}],"note":"360 answers measured 2026-10-01."}

Do the engines agree on who exists?

19 of the 30 brands were named by all 4 engines, and 3 were named by none of them (Crisp, Drift, Twist). The rest sit in between, visible to some engines and invisible to others.

The widest split was LiveChat: Gemini named it in 100% of the answers we asked about it, Claude in 0%. That comparison rests on the handful of questions we asked about that one brand, not on the full sample — treat it as a lead to investigate, not a law.

{"type":"bar","title":"How many engines named each brand","data":[{"label":"4 of 4 engines","value":19,"emphasis":false},{"label":"3 of 4 engines","value":4,"emphasis":false},{"label":"2 of 4 engines","value":2,"emphasis":false},{"label":"1 of 4 engines","value":2,"emphasis":false},{"label":"0 of 4 engines","value":3,"emphasis":true}],"note":"Brands, out of 30 measured."}

Brand by brand, the disagreement is easier to see than to describe. These are the 15 brands the engines split hardest on — each cell is how often that engine named that brand.

{"type":"heatmap","title":"Which engine names which brand","unit":"%","cols":["ChatGPT","Claude","Gemini","Perplexity"],"rows":[{"label":"LiveChat","cells":[33.3,0,100,66.7]},{"label":"Flock","cells":[66.7,0,0,0]},{"label":"Mattermost","cells":[100,100,33.3,33.3]},{"label":"Olark","cells":[66.7,0,33.3,33.3]},{"label":"Rocket.Chat","cells":[33.3,100,66.7,66.7]},{"label":"Tidio","cells":[0,66.7,33.3,66.7]},{"label":"Zendesk Chat","cells":[100,100,33.3,100]},{"label":"Front","cells":[33.3,66.7,33.3,66.7]},{"label":"Cisco Webex","cells":[66.7,100,100,66.7]},{"label":"Discord","cells":[100,100,100,66.7]},{"label":"Freshchat","cells":[33.3,0,0,33.3]},{"label":"Gmail","cells":[66.7,100,100,100]},{"label":"Nextiva","cells":[66.7,100,100,100]},{"label":"Outlook","cells":[66.7,100,100,66.7]},{"label":"RingCentral","cells":[0,33.3,33.3,33.3]}],"note":"The 15 brands with the widest spread between engines, out of 30 measured."}

Named is not the same as recommended

A mention is not an endorsement. Of every mention in this study, 41.8% was the engine's first recommendation, while 50.9% was the brand being offered as an alternative to something else. A brand can look visible and still only ever appear as the runner-up.

{"type":"bar","title":"What role the brand played when an engine named it","unit":"%","data":[{"label":"offered as an alternative","value":50.9,"emphasis":true},{"label":"recommended first","value":41.8,"emphasis":false},{"label":"listed in a comparison","value":6.8,"emphasis":false},{"label":"mentioned in passing","value":0.5,"emphasis":false}],"note":"Share of all mentions in this study."}

11 brands were named but never recommended first by any engine: Cisco Webex, Flock, Freshchat, Mattermost, Olark, Outlook, Rocket.Chat, Telegram, Wire, Zoho Mail, Zulip. For those, visibility work is not the problem — positioning is.

What the engines actually said

Scores are a summary. These are the sentences themselves — one from each engine, about a different brand, exactly as written on 2026-10-01.

ChatGPT, on Cisco Webex: "Cisco Webex: Known for its security features. Offers a range of collaboration tools alongside video conferencing. Suitable for larger organizations."

Claude, on Discord: "Discord - The most popular choice for gamers, Discord offers free voice, video, and text communication with excellent audio quality, low latency, and community-building features through servers and channels."

Gemini, on Gmail: "Gmail: Remaining the world's largest free email provider with approximately 1.8 billion users, Gmail is highly trusted for both personal and business use."

Perplexity, on Freshchat: "Freshchat/Freshdesk for multichannel support"

The engines are not criticising you. They are omitting you.

Of the 220 mentions in this study, 192 were positive in tone and 2 were negative. That is 87.3% positive. Reputation management is not the problem here: when an engine has something to say about a brand it is almost always kind, and when it has nothing to say it simply leaves the brand out. The gap to close is absence, not sentiment.

Which sources are the engines reading?

The engines cited zapier.com more than any other source (129 citations, 4.3% of all citations in this study). But the long tail is the real story: the top 10 domains together account for only 21.7% of citations. There is no short list of sites to get listed on — the engines are reading widely.

{"type":"bar","title":"Most-cited sources across every answer","data":[{"label":"zapier.com","value":129},{"label":"slack.com","value":114},{"label":"learn.g2.com","value":80},{"label":"pumble.com","value":66},{"label":"thedigitalprojectmanager.com","value":62},{"label":"proton.me","value":47},{"label":"microsoft.com","value":42},{"label":"pcmag.com","value":41},{"label":"larksuite.com","value":34},{"label":"guideflow.com","value":33}],"note":"Citations counted across 360 answers. \"Engines\" column below shows how many of the 4 cited each source."}

Source	Citations	Engines citing it
zapier.com	129	3 of 4
slack.com	114	2 of 4
learn.g2.com	80	4 of 4
pumble.com	66	3 of 4
thedigitalprojectmanager.com	62	3 of 4
proton.me	47	2 of 4
microsoft.com	42	2 of 4
pcmag.com	41	2 of 4
larksuite.com	34	3 of 4
guideflow.com	33	3 of 4

Who do the engines bring up instead?

These names were never in our sample — the engines volunteered them while answering about someone else. Slack came up against 14 of the 30 brands we measured. If you are in this category, these are the brands you are being compared to whether you like it or not.

{"type":"bar","title":"Names the engines volunteered, by how many of our brands they appeared against","data":[{"label":"Slack","value":14},{"label":"Zoom","value":8},{"label":"Google Workspace","value":7},{"label":"Intercom","value":6},{"label":"Zendesk","value":5},{"label":"iMessage","value":5},{"label":"Element","value":5},{"label":"Threema","value":4},{"label":"Zoom Workplace","value":4},{"label":"Proton Mail","value":4}],"note":"Not part of the sample; named by the engines on their own."}

Every brand we measured

Visibility is the share of scored answers in which an engine named the brand. Google Chat led at 100%; Twist came last at 0%.

Brand	Visibility	Answers naming it
Google Chat	100%	12 of 12
Google Meet	100%	12 of 12
Microsoft Teams	100%	12 of 12
ProtonMail	100%	12 of 12
Signal	100%	12 of 12
WhatsApp	100%	12 of 12
Discord	92%	11 of 12
Gmail	92%	11 of 12
Nextiva	92%	11 of 12
Telegram	92%	11 of 12
Zoho Mail	92%	11 of 12
Cisco Webex	83%	10 of 12
Outlook	83%	10 of 12
Zendesk Chat	83%	10 of 12
Mattermost	67%	8 of 12
Rocket.Chat	67%	8 of 12
Tawk.to	67%	8 of 12
Twilio	67%	8 of 12
Front	50%	6 of 12
LiveChat	50%	6 of 12
Tidio	42%	5 of 12
Olark	33%	4 of 12
RingCentral	25%	3 of 12
Flock	17%	2 of 12
Freshchat	17%	2 of 12
Wire	17%	2 of 12
Zulip	8%	1 of 12
Crisp	0%	0 of 12
Drift	0%	0 of 12
Twist	0%	0 of 12

What to do with this

Measure every engine, not one. The spread between the most and least generous engine in this study was 5.5 points. A check against a single engine tells you about that engine.
Check the role, not just the mention. 50.9% of mentions here put the brand in the alternative slot. Moving from alternative to first recommendation is a positioning problem, not a visibility one.
Follow the citations, not the keyword list. The engines quoted a wide spread of sources here; zapier.com was the single most cited. Earning a place on the pages an engine already reads is what changes an answer.
Zero is a starting point, not a verdict. 3 of 30 brands scored zero here. The first mention on any engine is the milestone that proves the sources are being read.
Do not budget for reputation defence you do not need. 87.3% of mentions here were positive. Spend on being present, not on being liked.

What this does not show

Each brand was measured on the questions our generator writes for that brand, not on one shared question set, so this is an average of per-brand measurements and not a like-for-like ranking.
Per-brand splits between engines rest on the few questions asked about that brand, not on the full sample of 30.
These are measurements taken on 2026-10-01. AI answers change; a score here is a reading on that date, not a permanent property of the brand.

Reproduce this

The raw answers are stored per brand, per engine, per question. The figures above come from:

select "brandName", "stratum", "visibility", "mentionCount" from "StudyResult" where "studyId" = 'cmuathe1b0008jn045m08vbv2' order by "visibility" desc

Want the same measurement for your own brand? The free check runs this exact pipeline.

Originally published on GeoBuddy Blog.

The AI Engines Keep Bringing Up Vultr: 30 Cloud, Hosting & Infrastructure Brands Measured

geobuddy — Sun, 20 Sep 2026 05:41:44 +0000

We asked 4 AI engines — ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini — the questions buyers actually type, about 30 Cloud, hosting & infrastructure brands, on 2026-09-20. That is 360 answers. One name kept appearing that we never asked about: the engines volunteered Vultr against 14 of the 30 brands we measured.

Every figure below comes from those answers, and the query to re-run them is at the bottom of this page.

Which engine actually names brands?

Not equally. Claude named a brand in 64.4% of its answers; Perplexity managed 51.1%. That is a 13.3-point gap between two engines asked identical questions on the same day, which is the whole argument for measuring more than one.

{"type":"bar","title":"Share of answers naming a brand, by engine (Cloud, hosting & infrastructure)","unit":"%","data":[{"label":"Claude","value":64.4},{"label":"ChatGPT","value":62.2},{"label":"Gemini","value":60},{"label":"Perplexity","value":51.1}],"note":"360 answers measured 2026-09-20."}

Do the engines agree on who exists?

18 of the 30 brands were named by all 4 engines, and 3 were named by none of them (Astro, Grasshopper, Hugo). The rest sit in between, visible to some engines and invisible to others.

The widest split was Tresorit: ChatGPT named it in 100% of the answers we asked about it, Perplexity in 0%. That comparison rests on the handful of questions we asked about that one brand, not on the full sample — treat it as a lead to investigate, not a law.

{"type":"bar","title":"How many engines named each brand","data":[{"label":"4 of 4 engines","value":18,"emphasis":false},{"label":"3 of 4 engines","value":7,"emphasis":false},{"label":"2 of 4 engines","value":2,"emphasis":false},{"label":"0 of 4 engines","value":3,"emphasis":true}],"note":"Brands, out of 30 measured."}

Brand by brand, the disagreement is easier to see than to describe. These are the 15 brands the engines split hardest on — each cell is how often that engine named that brand.

{"type":"heatmap","title":"Which engine names which brand","unit":"%","cols":["ChatGPT","Claude","Gemini","Perplexity"],"rows":[{"label":"Heroku","cells":[100,66.7,33.3,0]},{"label":"Proton Drive","cells":[0,66.7,100,100]},{"label":"Tresorit","cells":[100,100,66.7,0]},{"label":"Gatsby","cells":[66.7,33.3,33.3,0]},{"label":"Linode","cells":[100,100,33.3,33.3]},{"label":"pCloud","cells":[66.7,0,66.7,66.7]},{"label":"Zoom Phone","cells":[33.3,100,100,100]},{"label":"Dialpad","cells":[33.3,66.7,66.7,66.7]},{"label":"IBM Cloud","cells":[66.7,66.7,33.3,33.3]},{"label":"Jekyll","cells":[66.7,33.3,33.3,33.3]},{"label":"8x8","cells":[0,33.3,33.3,33.3]},{"label":"Alibaba Cloud","cells":[33.3,0,33.3,0]},{"label":"Cloudflare","cells":[100,100,66.7,66.7]},{"label":"DigitalOcean","cells":[100,66.7,100,66.7]},{"label":"MEGA","cells":[0,33.3,33.3,0]}],"note":"The 15 brands with the widest spread between engines, out of 30 measured."}

Named is not the same as recommended

A mention is not an endorsement. Of every mention in this study, 34.6% was the engine's first recommendation, while 48.6% was the brand being offered as an alternative to something else. A brand can look visible and still only ever appear as the runner-up.

{"type":"bar","title":"What role the brand played when an engine named it","unit":"%","data":[{"label":"offered as an alternative","value":48.6,"emphasis":true},{"label":"recommended first","value":34.6,"emphasis":false},{"label":"listed in a comparison","value":15.4,"emphasis":false},{"label":"mentioned in passing","value":0.9,"emphasis":false},{"label":"negative example","value":0.5,"emphasis":false}],"note":"Share of all mentions in this study."}

9 brands were named but never recommended first by any engine: 8x8, Alibaba Cloud, Gatsby, Google Cloud Platform (GCP), IBM Cloud, MEGA, Oracle Cloud, Tresorit, Vonage. For those, visibility work is not the problem — positioning is.

What the engines actually said

Scores are a summary. These are the sentences themselves — one from each engine, about a different brand, exactly as written on 2026-09-20.

ChatGPT, on Alibaba Cloud: "Alibaba Cloud - Major player in Asia, expanding globally. Strong e-commerce and compliance solutions. Competitive pricing and performance."

Claude, on 8x8: "8x8 – Focuses on global enterprise communications spanning UCaaS and contact center in one vendor stack, with its single-vendor global voice network and built-in analytics appealing to multinational teams."

Gemini, on Amazon Web Services (AWS): "Amazon Web Services (AWS) is the global market leader, known for its comprehensive service catalog of over 200 products, including computing (EC2), storage (S3), databases (RDS), and serverless functions (Lambda)."

Perplexity, on AWS: "AWS for large-scale, enterprise-grade deployments."

The engines are not criticising you. They are omitting you.

Of the 214 mentions in this study, 181 were positive in tone and 2 were negative. That is 84.6% positive. Reputation management is not the problem here: when an engine has something to say about a brand it is almost always kind, and when it has nothing to say it simply leaves the brand out. The gap to close is absence, not sentiment.

Which sources are the engines reading?

The engines cited digitalocean.com more than any other source (74 citations, 2.3% of all citations in this study). But the long tail is the real story: the top 10 domains together account for only 15.2% of citations. There is no short list of sites to get listed on — the engines are reading widely.

{"type":"bar","title":"Most-cited sources across every answer","data":[{"label":"digitalocean.com","value":74},{"label":"techradar.com","value":71},{"label":"northflank.com","value":61},{"label":"pcmag.com","value":59},{"label":"cloudzero.com","value":47},{"label":"zapier.com","value":44},{"label":"dev.to","value":41},{"label":"medium.com","value":36},{"label":"hostingadvice.com","value":33},{"label":"forbes.com","value":31}],"note":"Citations counted across 360 answers. \"Engines\" column below shows how many of the 4 cited each source."}

Source	Citations	Engines citing it
digitalocean.com	74	3 of 4
techradar.com	71	4 of 4
northflank.com	61	3 of 4
pcmag.com	59	2 of 4
cloudzero.com	47	3 of 4
zapier.com	44	3 of 4
dev.to	41	3 of 4
medium.com	36	3 of 4
hostingadvice.com	33	3 of 4
forbes.com	31	3 of 4

Who do the engines bring up instead?

These names were never in our sample — the engines volunteered them while answering about someone else. Vultr came up against 14 of the 30 brands we measured. If you are in this category, these are the brands you are being compared to whether you like it or not.

{"type":"bar","title":"Names the engines volunteered, by how many of our brands they appeared against","data":[{"label":"Vultr","value":14},{"label":"Hostinger","value":13},{"label":"Google Cloud Platform","value":10},{"label":"Google Cloud","value":10},{"label":"Cloudways","value":9},{"label":"Box","value":7},{"label":"SiteGround","value":7},{"label":"Google Drive","value":6},{"label":"Dropbox","value":6},{"label":"Oracle Cloud Infrastructure","value":6}],"note":"Not part of the sample; named by the engines on their own."}

Every brand we measured

Visibility is the share of scored answers in which an engine named the brand. Amazon Web Services (AWS) led at 100%; Hugo came last at 0%.

Brand	Visibility	Answers naming it
Amazon Web Services (AWS)	100%	12 of 12
AWS	100%	12 of 12
Google Cloud Platform (GCP)	100%	12 of 12
Microsoft OneDrive	100%	12 of 12
Microsoft Azure	92%	11 of 12
Next.js	92%	11 of 12
WordPress.org	92%	11 of 12
Cloudflare	83%	10 of 12
DigitalOcean	83%	10 of 12
Sync.com	83%	10 of 12
Zoom Phone	83%	10 of 12
Nuxt.js	75%	9 of 12
Eleventy (11ty)	67%	8 of 12
Linode	67%	8 of 12
Oracle Cloud	67%	8 of 12
Proton Drive	67%	8 of 12
Tresorit	67%	8 of 12
Dialpad	58%	7 of 12
Heroku	50%	6 of 12
IBM Cloud	50%	6 of 12
pCloud	50%	6 of 12
Jekyll	42%	5 of 12
Gatsby	33%	4 of 12
8x8	25%	3 of 12
Vonage	25%	3 of 12
Alibaba Cloud	17%	2 of 12
MEGA	17%	2 of 12
Astro	0%	0 of 12
Grasshopper	0%	0 of 12
Hugo	0%	0 of 12

What to do with this

Measure every engine, not one. The spread between the most and least generous engine in this study was 13.3 points. A check against a single engine tells you about that engine.
Check the role, not just the mention. 48.6% of mentions here put the brand in the alternative slot. Moving from alternative to first recommendation is a positioning problem, not a visibility one.
Follow the citations, not the keyword list. The engines quoted a wide spread of sources here; digitalocean.com was the single most cited. Earning a place on the pages an engine already reads is what changes an answer.
Zero is a starting point, not a verdict. 3 of 30 brands scored zero here. The first mention on any engine is the milestone that proves the sources are being read.
Do not budget for reputation defence you do not need. 84.6% of mentions here were positive. Spend on being present, not on being liked.

What this does not show

Each brand was measured on the questions our generator writes for that brand, not on one shared question set, so this is an average of per-brand measurements and not a like-for-like ranking.
Per-brand splits between engines rest on the few questions asked about that brand, not on the full sample of 30.
These are measurements taken on 2026-09-20. AI answers change; a score here is a reading on that date, not a permanent property of the brand.

Reproduce this

The raw answers are stored per brand, per engine, per question. The figures above come from:

select "brandName", "stratum", "visibility", "mentionCount" from "StudyResult" where "studyId" = 'cmu7swwer002ula04f9y8psr5' order by "visibility" desc

Want the same measurement for your own brand? The free check runs this exact pipeline.

Originally published on GeoBuddy Blog.

10 of 30 Clinics, Healthcare & Medical Services Brands Are Invisible to Every AI Engine

geobuddy — Mon, 14 Sep 2026 10:00:40 +0000

We asked 4 AI engines — ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini — the questions buyers actually type, about 30 Clinics, healthcare & medical services brands, on 2026-09-12. That is 360 answers. 10 of them were named by no engine at all.

Every figure below comes from those answers, and the query to re-run them is at the bottom of this page.

Which engine actually names brands?

Not equally. Perplexity named a brand in 42.2% of its answers; Claude managed 35.6%. That is a 6.6-point gap between two engines asked identical questions on the same day, which is the whole argument for measuring more than one.

{"type":"bar","title":"Share of answers naming a brand, by engine (Clinics, healthcare & medical services)","unit":"%","data":[{"label":"Perplexity","value":42.2},{"label":"ChatGPT","value":41.1},{"label":"Gemini","value":37.8},{"label":"Claude","value":35.6}],"note":"360 answers measured 2026-09-12."}

Do the engines agree on who exists?

17 of the 30 brands were named by all 4 engines, and 10 were named by none of them (Alliance Healthcare, Alto Pharmacy, Ascension, Cherokee, Dickies Medical, HCA Healthcare, Health Mart, L.A.B. (Light Activated Beauty), Landau, NurseLuxe). The rest sit in between, visible to some engines and invisible to others.

The widest split was Mayo Clinic: Perplexity named it in 100% of the answers we asked about it, ChatGPT in 33.3%. That comparison rests on the handful of questions we asked about that one brand, not on the full sample — treat it as a lead to investigate, not a law.

{"type":"bar","title":"How many engines named each brand","data":[{"label":"4 of 4 engines","value":17,"emphasis":false},{"label":"3 of 4 engines","value":3,"emphasis":false},{"label":"0 of 4 engines","value":10,"emphasis":true}],"note":"Brands, out of 30 measured."}

Brand by brand, the disagreement is easier to see than to describe. These are the 15 brands the engines split hardest on — each cell is how often that engine named that brand.

{"type":"heatmap","title":"Which engine names which brand","unit":"%","cols":["ChatGPT","Claude","Gemini","Perplexity"],"rows":[{"label":"Costco Pharmacy","cells":[66.7,66.7,33.3,100]},{"label":"Grey's Anatomy by Barco","cells":[100,33.3,33.3,66.7]},{"label":"Johns Hopkins Medicine","cells":[66.7,0,66.7,66.7]},{"label":"Kroger Pharmacy","cells":[33.3,66.7,33.3,0]},{"label":"Mayo Clinic","cells":[33.3,33.3,33.3,100]},{"label":"AmerisourceBergen Corporation","cells":[66.7,33.3,66.7,66.7]},{"label":"Cardinal Health, Inc.","cells":[66.7,33.3,33.3,33.3]},{"label":"CVS Health","cells":[66.7,66.7,33.3,33.3]},{"label":"Express Scripts","cells":[66.7,33.3,33.3,33.3]},{"label":"OptumRx","cells":[66.7,33.3,33.3,33.3]},{"label":"Rite Aid","cells":[66.7,33.3,33.3,66.7]},{"label":"Walmart Pharmacy","cells":[33.3,66.7,66.7,66.7]},{"label":"Amazon Pharmacy","cells":[66.7,100,100,66.7]},{"label":"Cardinal Health","cells":[66.7,66.7,100,100]},{"label":"Figs","cells":[66.7,100,100,100]}],"note":"The 15 brands with the widest spread between engines, out of 30 measured."}

Named is not the same as recommended

A mention is not an endorsement. Of every mention in this study, 30.5% was the engine's first recommendation, while 35.5% was the brand being offered as an alternative to something else. A brand can look visible and still only ever appear as the runner-up.

{"type":"bar","title":"What role the brand played when an engine named it","unit":"%","data":[{"label":"offered as an alternative","value":35.5,"emphasis":true},{"label":"recommended first","value":30.5,"emphasis":false},{"label":"listed in a comparison","value":30.5,"emphasis":false},{"label":"mentioned in passing","value":3.5,"emphasis":false}],"note":"Share of all mentions in this study."}

7 brands were named but never recommended first by any engine: AmerisourceBergen, AmerisourceBergen Corporation, Cardinal Health, Inc., Costco Pharmacy, Kroger Pharmacy, OptumRx, Rite Aid. For those, visibility work is not the problem — positioning is.

What the engines actually said

Scores are a summary. These are the sentences themselves — one from each engine, about a different brand, exactly as written on 2026-09-12.

ChatGPT, on Amazon Pharmacy: "Amazon Pharmacy offers a vast selection of prescription medications, including generics, with competitive pricing. Prime members enjoy free two-day delivery on eligible prescriptions."

Claude, on AmerisourceBergen: "AmerisourceBergen is a leader in drug distribution and also provides consulting in medical business operations and patient care."

Gemini, on Cardinal Health: "Cardinal Health specializes in the distribution of medical products and pharmaceuticals, with a global network and a significant presence in the healthcare industry, serving over 75% of U.S. hospitals."

Perplexity, on Cleveland Clinic: "Based on the sources provided, Mayo Clinic, Cleveland Clinic, Cedars-Sinai, Massachusetts General Hospital, Johns Hopkins Hospital, and Houston Methodist are among the most consistently top-ranked providers nationally."

The engines are not criticising you. They are omitting you.

Of the 141 mentions in this study, 105 were positive in tone and not one was negative. That is 74.5% positive. Reputation management is not the problem here: when an engine has something to say about a brand it is almost always kind, and when it has nothing to say it simply leaves the brand out. The gap to close is absence, not sentiment.

Which sources are the engines reading?

The engines cited beckershospitalreview.com more than any other source (79 citations, 2.5% of all citations in this study). But the long tail is the real story: the top 10 domains together account for only 11.3% of citations. There is no short list of sites to get listed on — the engines are reading widely.

{"type":"bar","title":"Most-cited sources across every answer","data":[{"label":"beckershospitalreview.com","value":79},{"label":"forbes.com","value":53},{"label":"health.usnews.com","value":32},{"label":"pedistat.com","value":31},{"label":"blueskyscrubs.com","value":30},{"label":"drugchannels.net","value":30},{"label":"cvs.com","value":28},{"label":"healthgrades.com","value":27},{"label":"rankings.newsweek.com","value":27},{"label":"reddit.com","value":27}],"note":"Citations counted across 360 answers. \"Engines\" column below shows how many of the 4 cited each source."}

Source	Citations	Engines citing it
beckershospitalreview.com	79	4 of 4
forbes.com	53	4 of 4
health.usnews.com	32	2 of 4
pedistat.com	31	4 of 4
blueskyscrubs.com	30	3 of 4
drugchannels.net	30	4 of 4
cvs.com	28	4 of 4
healthgrades.com	27	3 of 4
rankings.newsweek.com	27	3 of 4
reddit.com	27	2 of 4

Who do the engines bring up instead?

These names were never in our sample — the engines volunteered them while answering about someone else. CVS Pharmacy came up against 7 of the 30 brands we measured. If you are in this category, these are the brands you are being compared to whether you like it or not.

{"type":"bar","title":"Names the engines volunteered, by how many of our brands they appeared against","data":[{"label":"CVS Pharmacy","value":7},{"label":"GoodRx","value":5},{"label":"McKesson","value":4},{"label":"Medline","value":4},{"label":"CVS","value":4},{"label":"Kaiser Permanente","value":4},{"label":"Healing Hands","value":3},{"label":"Massachusetts General Hospital","value":3},{"label":"McKesson Corporation","value":3},{"label":"Cost Plus Drugs","value":3}],"note":"Not part of the sample; named by the engines on their own."}

Every brand we measured

Visibility is the share of scored answers in which an engine named the brand. Figs led at 92%; NurseLuxe came last at 0%.

Brand	Visibility	Answers naming it
Figs	92%	11 of 12
Amazon Pharmacy	83%	10 of 12
Cardinal Health	83%	10 of 12
Walgreens	83%	10 of 12
WonderWink	75%	9 of 12
AmerisourceBergen	67%	8 of 12
Cleveland Clinic	67%	8 of 12
Costco Pharmacy	67%	8 of 12
AmerisourceBergen Corporation	58%	7 of 12
Grey's Anatomy by Barco	58%	7 of 12
Walmart Pharmacy	58%	7 of 12
CVS Health	50%	6 of 12
Johns Hopkins Medicine	50%	6 of 12
Mayo Clinic	50%	6 of 12
Rite Aid	50%	6 of 12
Cardinal Health, Inc.	42%	5 of 12
Express Scripts	42%	5 of 12
OptumRx	42%	5 of 12
Kroger Pharmacy	33%	4 of 12
UCLA Health	25%	3 of 12
Alliance Healthcare	0%	0 of 12
Alto Pharmacy	0%	0 of 12
Ascension	0%	0 of 12
Cherokee	0%	0 of 12
Dickies Medical	0%	0 of 12
HCA Healthcare	0%	0 of 12
Health Mart	0%	0 of 12
L.A.B. (Light Activated Beauty)	0%	0 of 12
Landau	0%	0 of 12
NurseLuxe	0%	0 of 12

What to do with this

Measure every engine, not one. The spread between the most and least generous engine in this study was 6.6 points. A check against a single engine tells you about that engine.
Check the role, not just the mention. 35.5% of mentions here put the brand in the alternative slot. Moving from alternative to first recommendation is a positioning problem, not a visibility one.
Follow the citations, not the keyword list. The engines quoted a wide spread of sources here; beckershospitalreview.com was the single most cited. Earning a place on the pages an engine already reads is what changes an answer.
Zero is a starting point, not a verdict. 10 of 30 brands scored zero here. The first mention on any engine is the milestone that proves the sources are being read.
Do not budget for reputation defence you do not need. 74.5% of mentions here were positive. Spend on being present, not on being liked.

What this does not show

Each brand was measured on the questions our generator writes for that brand, not on one shared question set, so this is an average of per-brand measurements and not a like-for-like ranking.
Per-brand splits between engines rest on the few questions asked about that brand, not on the full sample of 30.
These are measurements taken on 2026-09-12. AI answers change; a score here is a reading on that date, not a permanent property of the brand.

Reproduce this

The raw answers are stored per brand, per engine, per question. The figures above come from:

select "brandName", "stratum", "visibility", "mentionCount" from "StudyResult" where "studyId" = 'cmtyyefq20002l504xf2qvf1h' order by "visibility" desc

Want the same measurement for your own brand? The free check runs this exact pipeline.

Originally published on GeoBuddy Blog.

The AI Engines Keep Bringing Up Matomo: 30 Analytics & Data Software Brands Measured

geobuddy — Sun, 13 Sep 2026 10:00:41 +0000

We asked 4 AI engines — ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini — the questions buyers actually type, about 30 Analytics & data software brands, on 2026-09-12. That is 360 answers. One name kept appearing that we never asked about: the engines volunteered Matomo against 11 of the 30 brands we measured.

Every figure below comes from those answers, and the query to re-run them is at the bottom of this page.

Which engine actually names brands?

Not equally. Gemini named a brand in 54.4% of its answers; Perplexity managed 36.7%. That is a 17.7-point gap between two engines asked identical questions on the same day, which is the whole argument for measuring more than one.

{"type":"bar","title":"Share of answers naming a brand, by engine (Analytics & data software)","unit":"%","data":[{"label":"Gemini","value":54.4},{"label":"ChatGPT","value":47.8},{"label":"Claude","value":43.3},{"label":"Perplexity","value":36.7}],"note":"360 answers measured 2026-09-12."}

Do the engines agree on who exists?

15 of the 30 brands were named by all 4 engines, and one was named by none of them (Fathom). The rest sit in between, visible to some engines and invisible to others.

The widest split was Amplitude: Claude named it in 100% of the answers we asked about it, ChatGPT in 0%. That comparison rests on the handful of questions we asked about that one brand, not on the full sample — treat it as a lead to investigate, not a law.

{"type":"bar","title":"How many engines named each brand","data":[{"label":"4 of 4 engines","value":15,"emphasis":false},{"label":"3 of 4 engines","value":6,"emphasis":false},{"label":"2 of 4 engines","value":3,"emphasis":false},{"label":"1 of 4 engines","value":5,"emphasis":false},{"label":"0 of 4 engines","value":1,"emphasis":true}],"note":"Brands, out of 30 measured."}

Brand by brand, the disagreement is easier to see than to describe. These are the 15 brands the engines split hardest on — each cell is how often that engine named that brand.

{"type":"heatmap","title":"Which engine names which brand","unit":"%","cols":["ChatGPT","Claude","Gemini","Perplexity"],"rows":[{"label":"Amplitude","cells":[0,100,66.7,66.7]},{"label":"Adobe Analytics","cells":[66.7,66.7,66.7,0]},{"label":"Everhour","cells":[66.7,0,0,0]},{"label":"Google Analytics 4","cells":[33.3,100,100,66.7]},{"label":"Heap","cells":[66.7,0,33.3,33.3]},{"label":"Mixpanel","cells":[100,100,100,33.3]},{"label":"Qlik Sense","cells":[33.3,66.7,100,33.3]},{"label":"RescueTime","cells":[66.7,0,33.3,33.3]},{"label":"TimeCamp","cells":[33.3,33.3,66.7,0]},{"label":"Domo","cells":[66.7,33.3,66.7,66.7]},{"label":"FullStory","cells":[33.3,33.3,66.7,33.3]},{"label":"Hotjar","cells":[66.7,33.3,66.7,33.3]},{"label":"Clockify","cells":[66.7,66.7,100,100]},{"label":"Contentsquare","cells":[0,0,33.3,0]},{"label":"Google Analytics","cells":[100,66.7,100,66.7]}],"note":"The 15 brands with the widest spread between engines, out of 30 measured."}

Named is not the same as recommended

A mention is not an endorsement. Of every mention in this study, 39.6% was the engine's first recommendation, while 51.8% was the brand being offered as an alternative to something else. A brand can look visible and still only ever appear as the runner-up.

{"type":"bar","title":"What role the brand played when an engine named it","unit":"%","data":[{"label":"offered as an alternative","value":51.8,"emphasis":true},{"label":"recommended first","value":39.6,"emphasis":false},{"label":"listed in a comparison","value":7.9,"emphasis":false},{"label":"mentioned in passing","value":0.6,"emphasis":false}],"note":"Share of all mentions in this study."}

9 brands were named but never recommended first by any engine: Everhour, Harvest, Heap, Hotjar, Hubstaff, Pendo, Qlik Sense, Segment, TimeCamp. For those, visibility work is not the problem — positioning is.

What the engines actually said

Scores are a summary. These are the sentences themselves — one from each engine, about a different brand, exactly as written on 2026-09-12.

ChatGPT, on Adobe Analytics: "Adobe Analytics - Best For: Comprehensive web analytics for large enterprises. - Key Features: Advanced segmentation, real-time data, and predictive analytics."

Claude, on Amplitude: "Use tools like Google Analytics, Mixpanel, or Amplitude to track user behavior, engagement metrics, conversion rates, and funnel analysis."

Gemini, on Clockify: "Clockify is consistently recommended as a top free time tracker, suitable for individuals and small teams due to its unlimited users, projects, and basic time-tracking features."

Perplexity, on Crazy Egg: "Crazy Egg is often ranked best for simple visual heatmaps and basic optimization workflows."

The engines are not criticising you. They are omitting you.

Of the 164 mentions in this study, 134 were positive in tone and 1 was negative. That is 81.7% positive. Reputation management is not the problem here: when an engine has something to say about a brand it is almost always kind, and when it has nothing to say it simply leaves the brand out. The gap to close is absence, not sentiment.

Which sources are the engines reading?

The engines cited learn.g2.com more than any other source (99 citations, 2.8% of all citations in this study). But the long tail is the real story: the top 10 domains together account for only 16.9% of citations. There is no short list of sites to get listed on — the engines are reading widely.

{"type":"bar","title":"Most-cited sources across every answer","data":[{"label":"learn.g2.com","value":99},{"label":"domo.com","value":82},{"label":"skyvia.com","value":72},{"label":"thedigitalprojectmanager.com","value":65},{"label":"contentsquare.com","value":54},{"label":"toolradar.com","value":51},{"label":"g2.com","value":50},{"label":"worldmetrics.org","value":47},{"label":"myhours.com","value":44},{"label":"thoughtspot.com","value":44}],"note":"Citations counted across 360 answers. \"Engines\" column below shows how many of the 4 cited each source."}

Source	Citations	Engines citing it
learn.g2.com	99	3 of 4
domo.com	82	3 of 4
skyvia.com	72	3 of 4
thedigitalprojectmanager.com	65	3 of 4
contentsquare.com	54	3 of 4
toolradar.com	51	2 of 4
g2.com	50	3 of 4
worldmetrics.org	47	2 of 4
myhours.com	44	3 of 4
thoughtspot.com	44	3 of 4

Who do the engines bring up instead?

These names were never in our sample — the engines volunteered them while answering about someone else. Matomo came up against 11 of the 30 brands we measured. If you are in this category, these are the brands you are being compared to whether you like it or not.

{"type":"bar","title":"Names the engines volunteered, by how many of our brands they appeared against","data":[{"label":"Matomo","value":11},{"label":"Microsoft Clarity","value":5},{"label":"ClickUp","value":4},{"label":"ThoughtSpot","value":3},{"label":"My Hours","value":3},{"label":"Todoist","value":3},{"label":"Plausible","value":3},{"label":"PostHog","value":3},{"label":"Google Data Studio","value":3},{"label":"Databricks","value":3}],"note":"Not part of the sample; named by the engines on their own."}

Every brand we measured

Visibility is the share of scored answers in which an engine named the brand. Tableau led at 100%; Fathom came last at 0%.

Brand	Visibility	Answers naming it
Tableau	100%	12 of 12
Microsoft Power BI	92%	11 of 12
Power BI	92%	11 of 12
Clockify	83%	10 of 12
Google Analytics	83%	10 of 12
Mixpanel	83%	10 of 12
Google Analytics 4	75%	9 of 12
Looker	75%	9 of 12
Toggl Track	75%	9 of 12
Amplitude	58%	7 of 12
Domo	58%	7 of 12
Qlik Sense	58%	7 of 12
Adobe Analytics	50%	6 of 12
Hotjar	50%	6 of 12
FullStory	42%	5 of 12
Crazy Egg	33%	4 of 12
Heap	33%	4 of 12
Hubstaff	33%	4 of 12
RescueTime	33%	4 of 12
TimeCamp	33%	4 of 12
Time Doctor	25%	3 of 12
Everhour	17%	2 of 12
Segment	17%	2 of 12
Sisense	17%	2 of 12
Timely	17%	2 of 12
Contentsquare	8%	1 of 12
Harvest	8%	1 of 12
Paymo	8%	1 of 12
Pendo	8%	1 of 12
Fathom	0%	0 of 12

What to do with this

Measure every engine, not one. The spread between the most and least generous engine in this study was 17.7 points. A check against a single engine tells you about that engine.
Check the role, not just the mention. 51.8% of mentions here put the brand in the alternative slot. Moving from alternative to first recommendation is a positioning problem, not a visibility one.
Follow the citations, not the keyword list. The engines quoted a wide spread of sources here; learn.g2.com was the single most cited. Earning a place on the pages an engine already reads is what changes an answer.
Zero is a starting point, not a verdict. 1 of 30 brands scored zero here. The first mention on any engine is the milestone that proves the sources are being read.
Do not budget for reputation defence you do not need. 81.7% of mentions here were positive. Spend on being present, not on being liked.

What this does not show

Each brand was measured on the questions our generator writes for that brand, not on one shared question set, so this is an average of per-brand measurements and not a like-for-like ranking.
Per-brand splits between engines rest on the few questions asked about that brand, not on the full sample of 30.
These are measurements taken on 2026-09-12. AI answers change; a score here is a reading on that date, not a permanent property of the brand.

Reproduce this

The raw answers are stored per brand, per engine, per question. The figures above come from:

select "brandName", "stratum", "visibility", "mentionCount" from "StudyResult" where "studyId" = 'cmtyqpr3o0003ji04bhwqpyua' order by "visibility" desc

Want the same measurement for your own brand? The free check runs this exact pipeline.

Originally published on GeoBuddy Blog.

Most AI Mentions Are Runner-Up Mentions: 30 AI Tools & Assistants Brands Measured

geobuddy — Sun, 13 Sep 2026 10:00:40 +0000

We asked 4 AI engines — ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini — the questions buyers actually type, about 30 AI tools & assistants brands, on 2026-09-12. That is 359 answers. 44.4% of the mentions we found were not recommendations at all — they were the brand being offered as an alternative to something else.

Every figure below comes from those answers, and the query to re-run them is at the bottom of this page.

Which engine actually names brands?

Not equally. Gemini named a brand in 58.4% of its answers; ChatGPT managed 50%. That is an 8.4-point gap between two engines asked identical questions on the same day, which is the whole argument for measuring more than one.

{"type":"bar","title":"Share of answers naming a brand, by engine (AI tools & assistants)","unit":"%","data":[{"label":"Gemini","value":58.4},{"label":"Perplexity","value":56.7},{"label":"Claude","value":53.3},{"label":"ChatGPT","value":50}],"note":"359 answers measured 2026-09-12."}

Do the engines agree on who exists?

21 of the 30 brands were named by all 4 engines, and one was named by none of them (DeepBrain). The rest sit in between, visible to some engines and invisible to others.

The widest split was Claude: Perplexity named it in 100% of the answers we asked about it, ChatGPT in 0%. That comparison rests on the handful of questions we asked about that one brand, not on the full sample — treat it as a lead to investigate, not a law.

{"type":"bar","title":"How many engines named each brand","data":[{"label":"4 of 4 engines","value":21,"emphasis":false},{"label":"3 of 4 engines","value":7,"emphasis":false},{"label":"1 of 4 engines","value":1,"emphasis":false},{"label":"0 of 4 engines","value":1,"emphasis":true}],"note":"Brands, out of 30 measured."}

Brand by brand, the disagreement is easier to see than to describe. These are the 15 brands the engines split hardest on — each cell is how often that engine named that brand.

{"type":"heatmap","title":"Which engine names which brand","unit":"%","cols":["ChatGPT","Claude","Gemini","Perplexity"],"rows":[{"label":"Adobe Firefly","cells":[0,100,100,100]},{"label":"CapCut","cells":[0,66.7,100,100]},{"label":"Claude","cells":[0,66.7,66.7,100]},{"label":"Descript","cells":[33.3,33.3,66.7,100]},{"label":"IBM Watson","cells":[100,33.3,33.3,33.3]},{"label":"Runway","cells":[33.3,100,66.7,66.7]},{"label":"Writesonic","cells":[66.7,0,66.7,66.7]},{"label":"Ada","cells":[33.3,33.3,66.7,33.3]},{"label":"ChatGPT","cells":[33.3,66.7,33.3,33.3]},{"label":"Copy.ai","cells":[66.7,33.3,66.7,33.3]},{"label":"Notion AI","cells":[66.7,66.7,33.3,66.7]},{"label":"QuillBot","cells":[66.7,33.3,66.7,66.7]},{"label":"Runway ML","cells":[66.7,66.7,50,33.3]},{"label":"Rytr","cells":[66.7,33.3,66.7,33.3]},{"label":"Stable Diffusion","cells":[66.7,33.3,66.7,33.3]}],"note":"The 15 brands with the widest spread between engines, out of 30 measured."}

Named is not the same as recommended

A mention is not an endorsement. Of every mention in this study, 42.3% was the engine's first recommendation, while 44.4% was the brand being offered as an alternative to something else. A brand can look visible and still only ever appear as the runner-up.

{"type":"bar","title":"What role the brand played when an engine named it","unit":"%","data":[{"label":"offered as an alternative","value":44.4,"emphasis":true},{"label":"recommended first","value":42.3,"emphasis":false},{"label":"listed in a comparison","value":12.8,"emphasis":false},{"label":"mentioned in passing","value":0.5,"emphasis":false}],"note":"Share of all mentions in this study."}

6 brands were named but never recommended first by any engine: InVideo, Lumen5, Pictory, Stable Diffusion, Sudowrite, Writesonic. For those, visibility work is not the problem — positioning is.

What the engines actually said

Scores are a summary. These are the sentences themselves — one from each engine, about a different brand, exactly as written on 2026-09-12.

ChatGPT, on Ada: "Ada: A dedicated AI chatbot platform that allows businesses to build automated and personalized customer experiences without coding."

Claude, on Adobe Firefly: "Adobe Firefly represents the cutting edge of AI for design software, offering a comprehensive suite of generative AI tools specifically built for creative professionals."

Gemini, on CapCut: "CapCut is considered one of the easiest video editors for beginners and is very popular for quick edits, especially on mobile devices."

Perplexity, on Claude: "Best for long documents and nuanced writing: Claude."

The engines are not criticising you. They are omitting you.

Of the 196 mentions in this study, 170 were positive in tone and 1 was negative. That is 86.7% positive. Reputation management is not the problem here: when an engine has something to say about a brand it is almost always kind, and when it has nothing to say it simply leaves the brand out. The gap to close is absence, not sentiment.

Which sources are the engines reading?

The engines cited zapier.com more than any other source (106 citations, 3.1% of all citations in this study). But the long tail is the real story: the top 10 domains together account for only 13.6% of citations. There is no short list of sites to get listed on — the engines are reading widely.

{"type":"bar","title":"Most-cited sources across every answer","data":[{"label":"zapier.com","value":106},{"label":"reddit.com","value":74},{"label":"learn.g2.com","value":45},{"label":"pcmag.com","value":45},{"label":"eesel.ai","value":39},{"label":"guideflow.com","value":37},{"label":"techradar.com","value":36},{"label":"buffer.com","value":28},{"label":"lindy.ai","value":28},{"label":"toolradar.com","value":27}],"note":"Citations counted across 359 answers. \"Engines\" column below shows how many of the 4 cited each source."}

Source	Citations	Engines citing it
zapier.com	106	3 of 4
reddit.com	74	2 of 4
learn.g2.com	45	3 of 4
pcmag.com	45	2 of 4
eesel.ai	39	3 of 4
guideflow.com	37	3 of 4
techradar.com	36	4 of 4
buffer.com	28	3 of 4
lindy.ai	28	3 of 4
toolradar.com	27	2 of 4

Who do the engines bring up instead?

These names were never in our sample — the engines volunteered them while answering about someone else. Google Gemini came up against 7 of the 30 brands we measured. If you are in this category, these are the brands you are being compared to whether you like it or not.

{"type":"bar","title":"Names the engines volunteered, by how many of our brands they appeared against","data":[{"label":"Google Gemini","value":7},{"label":"Adobe Premiere Pro","value":5},{"label":"Perplexity","value":5},{"label":"Microsoft Copilot","value":4},{"label":"Wordtune","value":3},{"label":"Jasper AI","value":3},{"label":"Anyword","value":3},{"label":"Gemini","value":3},{"label":"DALL-E 3","value":3},{"label":"Final Cut Pro","value":2}],"note":"Not part of the sample; named by the engines on their own."}

Every brand we measured

Visibility is the share of scored answers in which an engine named the brand. DaVinci Resolve led at 100%; DeepBrain came last at 0%.

Brand	Visibility	Answers naming it
DaVinci Resolve	100%	12 of 12
Rasa	92%	11 of 12
Grammarly	83%	10 of 12
Adobe Firefly	75%	9 of 12
Jasper	75%	9 of 12
Midjourney	75%	9 of 12
CapCut	67%	8 of 12
DataRobot	67%	8 of 12
Hugging Face	67%	8 of 12
ManyChat	67%	8 of 12
Runway	67%	8 of 12
Claude	58%	7 of 12
Descript	58%	7 of 12
Notion AI	58%	7 of 12
QuillBot	58%	7 of 12
Runway ML	55%	6 of 11
Copy.ai	50%	6 of 12
IBM Watson	50%	6 of 12
Rytr	50%	6 of 12
Stable Diffusion	50%	6 of 12
Sudowrite	50%	6 of 12
Synthesia	50%	6 of 12
Writesonic	50%	6 of 12
Ada	42%	5 of 12
ChatGPT	42%	5 of 12
HeyGen	25%	3 of 12
InVideo	25%	3 of 12
Pictory	25%	3 of 12
Lumen5	8%	1 of 12
DeepBrain	0%	0 of 12

What to do with this

Measure every engine, not one. The spread between the most and least generous engine in this study was 8.4 points. A check against a single engine tells you about that engine.
Check the role, not just the mention. 44.4% of mentions here put the brand in the alternative slot. Moving from alternative to first recommendation is a positioning problem, not a visibility one.
Follow the citations, not the keyword list. The engines quoted a wide spread of sources here; zapier.com was the single most cited. Earning a place on the pages an engine already reads is what changes an answer.
Zero is a starting point, not a verdict. 1 of 30 brands scored zero here. The first mention on any engine is the milestone that proves the sources are being read.
Do not budget for reputation defence you do not need. 86.7% of mentions here were positive. Spend on being present, not on being liked.

What this does not show

Each brand was measured on the questions our generator writes for that brand, not on one shared question set, so this is an average of per-brand measurements and not a like-for-like ranking.
Per-brand splits between engines rest on the few questions asked about that brand, not on the full sample of 30.
These are measurements taken on 2026-09-12. AI answers change; a score here is a reading on that date, not a permanent property of the brand.

Reproduce this

The raw answers are stored per brand, per engine, per question. The figures above come from:

select "brandName", "stratum", "visibility", "mentionCount" from "StudyResult" where "studyId" = 'cmtypqjgh0001bj2ok6juyqr4' order by "visibility" desc

Want the same measurement for your own brand? The free check runs this exact pipeline.

Originally published on GeoBuddy Blog.

The AI Engines Keep Bringing Up Power Automate: 30 Automation, No-code & Integration Brands Measured

geobuddy — Sat, 12 Sep 2026 22:25:21 +0000

We asked 4 AI engines — ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini — the questions buyers actually type, about 30 Automation, no-code & integration brands, on 2026-09-12. That is 360 answers. One name kept appearing that we never asked about: the engines volunteered Power Automate against 8 of the 30 brands we measured.

Every figure below comes from those answers, and the query to re-run them is at the bottom of this page.

Which engine actually names brands?

Not equally. Gemini named a brand in 37.8% of its answers; Claude managed 27.8%. That is a 10-point gap between two engines asked identical questions on the same day, which is the whole argument for measuring more than one.

{"type":"bar","title":"Share of answers naming a brand, by engine (Automation, no-code & integration)","unit":"%","data":[{"label":"Gemini","value":37.8},{"label":"ChatGPT","value":36.7},{"label":"Perplexity","value":34.4},{"label":"Claude","value":27.8}],"note":"360 answers measured 2026-09-12."}

Do the engines agree on who exists?

10 of the 30 brands were named by all 4 engines, and 6 were named by none of them (Bubble, Firebase, Glide, Glitch, Mavenlink, Zoho Creator). The rest sit in between, visible to some engines and invisible to others.

The widest split was Microsoft Power Automate: Gemini named it in 100% of the answers we asked about it, Claude in 0%. That comparison rests on the handful of questions we asked about that one brand, not on the full sample — treat it as a lead to investigate, not a law.

{"type":"bar","title":"How many engines named each brand","data":[{"label":"4 of 4 engines","value":10,"emphasis":false},{"label":"3 of 4 engines","value":5,"emphasis":false},{"label":"2 of 4 engines","value":2,"emphasis":false},{"label":"1 of 4 engines","value":7,"emphasis":false},{"label":"0 of 4 engines","value":6,"emphasis":true}],"note":"Brands, out of 30 measured."}

Brand by brand, the disagreement is easier to see than to describe. These are the 15 brands the engines split hardest on — each cell is how often that engine named that brand.

{"type":"heatmap","title":"Which engine names which brand","unit":"%","cols":["ChatGPT","Claude","Gemini","Perplexity"],"rows":[{"label":"Microsoft Power Automate","cells":[66.7,0,100,33.3]},{"label":"n8n","cells":[0,100,100,100]},{"label":"Softr","cells":[0,100,33.3,33.3]},{"label":"Airtable","cells":[66.7,0,33.3,33.3]},{"label":"Automate.io","cells":[66.7,0,0,0]},{"label":"Gumloop","cells":[0,33.3,66.7,66.7]},{"label":"Make (formerly Integromat)","cells":[66.7,33.3,66.7,100]},{"label":"Thunkable","cells":[66.7,0,0,0]},{"label":"Workato","cells":[33.3,33.3,100,100]},{"label":"Automation Anywhere","cells":[66.7,33.3,66.7,33.3]},{"label":"Supabase","cells":[33.3,33.3,33.3,66.7]},{"label":"Uipath","cells":[66.7,66.7,66.7,33.3]},{"label":"Zapier","cells":[66.7,66.7,66.7,33.3]},{"label":"Adalo","cells":[100,66.7,100,66.7]},{"label":"Airtable Automations","cells":[33.3,0,0,0]}],"note":"The 15 brands with the widest spread between engines, out of 30 measured."}

Named is not the same as recommended

A mention is not an endorsement. Of every mention in this study, 25.2% was the engine's first recommendation, while 65% was the brand being offered as an alternative to something else. A brand can look visible and still only ever appear as the runner-up.

{"type":"bar","title":"What role the brand played when an engine named it","unit":"%","data":[{"label":"offered as an alternative","value":65,"emphasis":true},{"label":"recommended first","value":25.2,"emphasis":false},{"label":"listed in a comparison","value":8.1,"emphasis":false},{"label":"mentioned in passing","value":1.6,"emphasis":false}],"note":"Share of all mentions in this study."}

10 brands were named but never recommended first by any engine: Airtable, Airtable Automations, Appgyver, Automate.io, FlutterFlow, IFTTT, Make, OutSystems, Retool, Thunkable. For those, visibility work is not the problem — positioning is.

What the engines actually said

Scores are a summary. These are the sentences themselves — one from each engine, about a different brand, exactly as written on 2026-09-12.

ChatGPT, on Adalo: "Adalo - Focused on mobile app development. Easy to use with pre-built components and databases."

Claude, on IFTTT: "IFTTT (If This Then That) - Simple, user-friendly platform for basic automations between apps and services."

Gemini, on Airtable: "Airtable functions as a no-code database and spreadsheet alternative that includes native automation features, making it ideal for managing records and automating processes within a single tool."

Perplexity, on Automation Anywhere: "Choose Automation Anywhere if you want the most direct enterprise RPA alternative."

The engines are not criticising you. They are omitting you.

Of the 123 mentions in this study, 104 were positive in tone and not one was negative. That is 84.6% positive. Reputation management is not the problem here: when an engine has something to say about a brand it is almost always kind, and when it has nothing to say it simply leaves the brand out. The gap to close is absence, not sentiment.

Which sources are the engines reading?

The engines cited zapier.com more than any other source (183 citations, 5.3% of all citations in this study). But the long tail is the real story: the top 10 domains together account for only 25.2% of citations. There is no short list of sites to get listed on — the engines are reading widely.

{"type":"bar","title":"Most-cited sources across every answer","data":[{"label":"zapier.com","value":183},{"label":"gumloop.com","value":114},{"label":"reddit.com","value":94},{"label":"zite.com","value":77},{"label":"lindy.ai","value":76},{"label":"vellum.ai","value":72},{"label":"blaze.tech","value":71},{"label":"thedigitalprojectmanager.com","value":69},{"label":"gartner.com","value":60},{"label":"unito.io","value":55}],"note":"Citations counted across 360 answers. \"Engines\" column below shows how many of the 4 cited each source."}

Source	Citations	Engines citing it
zapier.com	183	3 of 4
gumloop.com	114	3 of 4
reddit.com	94	2 of 4
zite.com	77	3 of 4
lindy.ai	76	3 of 4
vellum.ai	72	3 of 4
blaze.tech	71	3 of 4
thedigitalprojectmanager.com	69	3 of 4
gartner.com	60	3 of 4
unito.io	55	3 of 4

Who do the engines bring up instead?

These names were never in our sample — the engines volunteered them while answering about someone else. Power Automate came up against 8 of the 30 brands we measured. If you are in this category, these are the brands you are being compared to whether you like it or not.

{"type":"bar","title":"Names the engines volunteered, by how many of our brands they appeared against","data":[{"label":"Power Automate","value":8},{"label":"Dell Boomi","value":4},{"label":"Boomi","value":4},{"label":"SnapLogic","value":4},{"label":"Unito","value":4},{"label":"Kissflow","value":4},{"label":"MuleSoft","value":3},{"label":"MuleSoft Anypoint Platform","value":3},{"label":"Informatica IDMC","value":3},{"label":"Celigo","value":3}],"note":"Not part of the sample; named by the engines on their own."}

Every brand we measured

Visibility is the share of scored answers in which an engine named the brand. Webflow led at 100%; Zoho Creator came last at 0%.

Brand	Visibility	Answers naming it
Webflow	100%	12 of 12
Adalo	83%	10 of 12
Integromat (Make)	83%	10 of 12
n8n	75%	9 of 12
Make	67%	8 of 12
Make (formerly Integromat)	67%	8 of 12
Workato	67%	8 of 12
Uipath	58%	7 of 12
Zapier	58%	7 of 12
Automation Anywhere	50%	6 of 12
Microsoft Power Automate	50%	6 of 12
Gumloop	42%	5 of 12
Softr	42%	5 of 12
Supabase	42%	5 of 12
Airtable	33%	4 of 12
Automate.io	17%	2 of 12
Blue Prism	17%	2 of 12
FlutterFlow	17%	2 of 12
Thunkable	17%	2 of 12
Airtable Automations	8%	1 of 12
Appgyver	8%	1 of 12
IFTTT	8%	1 of 12
OutSystems	8%	1 of 12
Retool	8%	1 of 12
Bubble	0%	0 of 12
Firebase	0%	0 of 12
Glide	0%	0 of 12
Glitch	0%	0 of 12
Mavenlink	0%	0 of 12
Zoho Creator	0%	0 of 12

What to do with this

Measure every engine, not one. The spread between the most and least generous engine in this study was 10 points. A check against a single engine tells you about that engine.
Check the role, not just the mention. 65% of mentions here put the brand in the alternative slot. Moving from alternative to first recommendation is a positioning problem, not a visibility one.
Follow the citations, not the keyword list. The engines quoted a wide spread of sources here; zapier.com was the single most cited. Earning a place on the pages an engine already reads is what changes an answer.
Zero is a starting point, not a verdict. 6 of 30 brands scored zero here. The first mention on any engine is the milestone that proves the sources are being read.
Do not budget for reputation defence you do not need. 84.6% of mentions here were positive. Spend on being present, not on being liked.

What this does not show

Each brand was measured on the questions our generator writes for that brand, not on one shared question set, so this is an average of per-brand measurements and not a like-for-like ranking.
Per-brand splits between engines rest on the few questions asked about that brand, not on the full sample of 30.
These are measurements taken on 2026-09-12. AI answers change; a score here is a reading on that date, not a permanent property of the brand.

Reproduce this

The raw answers are stored per brand, per engine, per question. The figures above come from:

select "brandName", "stratum", "visibility", "mentionCount" from "StudyResult" where "studyId" = 'cmtyy8ia00003l104n4kri1x5' order by "visibility" desc

Want the same measurement for your own brand? The free check runs this exact pipeline.

Originally published on GeoBuddy Blog.

AI Is the New Shelf Space: Brand Placement Strategies for ChatGPT, Claude & Gemini

geobuddy — Wed, 01 Apr 2026 10:00:36 +0000

See dedicated page

Originally published on GeoBuddy Blog.

Your Brand Has 4 Different Reputations: A Guide to Multi-Engine GEO

geobuddy — Tue, 31 Mar 2026 10:00:26 +0000

See dedicated page

Originally published on GeoBuddy Blog.

Gemini's Secret Favorites: Brands Only Google's AI Recommends

geobuddy — Tue, 31 Mar 2026 10:00:25 +0000

See dedicated page

Originally published on GeoBuddy Blog.

AI Response Anatomy: How Response Length, Citations, and Competitors Shape Your Brand's Visibility

geobuddy — Mon, 30 Mar 2026 10:00:16 +0000

See dedicated page

Originally published on GeoBuddy Blog.

AI Is the New Kingmaker: How ChatGPT, Gemini & Claude Are Picking Winners and Losers in Every Industry

geobuddy — Mon, 30 Mar 2026 10:00:15 +0000

See dedicated page

Originally published on GeoBuddy Blog.