# AEO AI Visibility: Who the Engines Recommend **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](/aeo/)** (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](/profound/) | 5 | 6 | 9 | 8 | **28** | 11/15 | | 2 | [Otterly AI](/otterly-ai/) | 4 | 4 | 7 | 9 | **24** | 10/15 | | 3 | [Peec AI](/peec-ai/) | 4 | 5 | 5 | 9 | **23** | 11/15 | | 4 | [Ahrefs](/ahrefs/) | 2 | 4 | 3 | 5 | **14** | 7/15 | | 5 | [HubSpot](/hubspot/) | 1 | 4 | 5 | 0 | **10** | 6/15 | | 6 | [AthenaHQ](/athenahq/) | 2 | 5 | 2 | 0 | **9** | 5/15 | | 7 | [Scrunch AI](/scrunch-ai/) | 0 | 1 | 2 | 4 | **7** | 5/15 | | 8 | [BrightEdge](/brightedge/) | 0 | 1 | 0 | 4 | **5** | 5/15 | | 9 | [Evertune](/evertune/) | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | **5** | 5/15 | | 10 | [Goodie AI](/goodie-ai/) | 0 | 2 | 2 | 1 | **5** | 3/15 | | 11 | [Conductor](/conductor/) | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | **4** | 1/15 | | 12 | [AirOps](/airops/) | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | **2** | 2/15 | | 13 | [Bluefish AI](/bluefish-ai/) | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | **1** | 1/15 | | 14 | [Botify](/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: - Best AI search visibility tools for SaaS marketing teams - How could I build an AEO / LLM-visibility tracking tool myself? - How do I get my company recommended by ChatGPT to buyers? - How do I measure whether AI search is actually sending me traffic? - How do I monitor my brand's share of voice in AI answers? - Profound vs Peec AI vs AthenaHQ — which AEO tool should I pick? - What are good alternatives to Profound for AI search visibility? - What are the best AEO (answer engine optimization) tools? - What are the best AEO tools for a B2B enterprise? - What are the best AEO tools for a B2B startup? - What are the best generative engine optimization (GEO) platforms in 2026? - What tools track how my brand appears in ChatGPT and Perplexity? - What's the best AEO tool for a small marketing team on a budget? - What's the best open-source way to track LLM citations? - Which AEO platform has the best methodology for measuring AI visibility? ## 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 - **Engines:** ChatGPT (GPT-4.1), Gemini 2.5 Flash, Perplexity Sonar Pro via API, plus Claude run in a clean session (no prior context that could bias it toward us). - **Web-grounded vs parametric.** Web-grounded answers (the engine searched the live web) are the KPI — they're what a buyer sees today. Parametric answers (the model's trained knowledge, no search) move slowly and are tracked as a tripwire. - **Detection** is alias-matched against our tracked vendor roster, case-insensitive. Common-word names only count with category context, so a sentence about molded clay doesn't score for Clay. - **Cadence:** weekly, same queries, results archived per run. The raw counts feed the AI-Visibility component of the Presence score on every profile. ## 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](https://airtable.com/app5ANdeTK06YtG0k/pag6V5L6XtCMBD9Th/form). **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.