Adam's GTM Report

AdamGTM Stack

Updated 2026-06-14

AEO AI Visibility: Who the Engines Recommend

Every week we ask ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, and Claude the questions AEO buyers actually ask, and record which vendors get named. This is the live tally.

The question behind this page: when a buyer asks an AI engine for AEO help, who gets named? We run 15 buyer-intent queries through ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity and Claude every week and count the answers. No panel, no survey, no vendor self-reporting — just what the engines actually say. Latest run: 2026-06-14, 58 web-grounded answers.

This is one of the two dimensions this guide tracks that a traditional analyst report can't: AI visibility (are you in the answers?) and agent-readiness (can agents build on you?). The counts below feed the AI-Visibility share of each vendor's Presence score.

The leaderboard

# Vendor ChatGPT Gemini Perplexity Claude Total Queries named in
1 Profound 5 6 9 8 28 11/15
2 Otterly AI 4 4 7 9 24 10/15
3 Peec AI 4 5 5 9 23 11/15
4 Ahrefs 2 4 3 5 14 7/15
5 HubSpot 1 4 5 0 10 6/15
6 AthenaHQ 2 5 2 0 9 5/15
7 Scrunch AI 0 1 2 4 7 5/15
8 BrightEdge 0 1 0 4 5 5/15
9 Evertune 2 2 1 0 5 5/15
10 Goodie AI 0 2 2 1 5 3/15
11 Conductor 1 1 1 1 4 1/15
12 AirOps 1 0 1 0 2 2/15
13 Bluefish AI 1 0 0 0 1 1/15
14 Botify 0 1 0 0 1 1/15

Counts are answer-level mentions across the 2026-06-14 run: one query answered by one engine = one answer; a vendor named in that answer scores 1. Web-grounded answers only (the engine searched the live web).

Named zero times this run (of the platforms we profile): AIVO, Adobe LLM Optimizer, Amplitude, Brandlight, Demand-Genius, Gumshoe AI, Meltwater, Pixis Visibility, Quattr, Semrush (Enterprise AIO), Siteimprove. A zero here is a data point, not a verdict — it means the engines aren't naming them on these buyer questions yet.

The questions we ask

Fixed buyer-intent prompts, spelled out the way a real buyer types them. Published in full so the method is checkable:

Run history

Run Answers Top cited
2026-05-25 75 Profound (19), Peec AI (18), AthenaHQ (14)
2026-05-27 96 Profound (20), Peec AI (19), AthenaHQ (15)
2026-05-28 72 Profound (28), Ahrefs (27), Peec AI (18)
2026-05-31 72 Ahrefs (31), Profound (26), Otterly AI (25)
2026-06-14 72 Profound (30), Otterly AI (26), Peec AI (25)

Early runs used a different query set; counts are comparable within a run, directional across runs. The 2026-05-28 run onward is the stable methodology.

Our own number

We hold this guide to the same bar. On the 2026-06-14 run, adamgtm.com was cited in 0 of 60 web-grounded answers. That's the baseline, published, tracked weekly. When it moves, you'll see it move here.

Method

FAQ

Why isn't my company on the leaderboard?

Either the engines didn't name it this run, or it isn't in our tracked roster yet. Profiles and roster additions start at Add a Company.

Can vendors game this?

The queries are fixed, published above, and phrased as buyer questions, not vendor names. If a vendor earns more citations in real answers, the number goes up. That's the point.

Why do the engines disagree?

Different search indexes, different source weighting, different training data. The per-engine columns are the read: a vendor strong on Perplexity but absent on ChatGPT has a source-coverage gap, not a content problem.

How is this different from share of voice?

Share of voice measures who humans talk about. This measures who the machines recommend. They diverge, and the divergence is the most interesting signal on this page.