Fractl ResearchJuly 202611,573 AI answers · 15 industries · 6 engines · ~1,000 buyer queries

What AI actually recommends

We measured every brand and every source in 11,573 AI answers across 15 industries — and found that AI recommends the brands it reads about on the sites it cites. Getting onto those sites is earned media. It just became how you win.

The bottom line, up front

AI recommends the brands that are written about on the sites it cites. Getting featured on those sites — earned media and digital PR — is now the highest-leverage way to win AI recommendations.

Whoever the AI names, wins

Search is splitting in two. Alongside Google's blue links, ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Copilot and Google's own AI answers now hand people a short list of brands and a few cited sources. Whoever the AI names makes the buying shortlist — and almost everything the marketing world "knows" about how that list gets made is folklore.

So we measured it. We took ~1,000 real commercial buyer questions across 15 industries and ran each through six engines, capturing which brands got recommended, which sources got cited, and the full page behind every citation. Then we did the one thing no visibility tool does: we joined it to what's actually inside the AI's training data — so we could tell whether a brand is recommended because the model learned it long ago, or because it's being read about right now.

11,573 answers · 15 industries · 6 engines · 8,784 brands · 18,422 domains cited · 36,413 pages read. Every query was run twice on each engine; the collection was stress-tested by five independent reviews before we spent a dollar; every headline number survived a check that it wasn't a quirk of measurement.

The sites AI trusts — and they're not who you'd guess

Two sources sit at the top of nearly every industry: Reddit and YouTube. Then each industry has its own short list of authority sites.

A brand's own website rarely wins a citation. You get cited by being written about elsewhere — on user forums, video reviews, and the specific outlets AI leans on for your sector.

IndustryThe sites AI actually cites
AutomotiveCar and Driver · MotorTrend · Edmunds
Financial servicesNerdWallet · Bankrate · CNBC · Forbes
SoftwareTechRadar · Zapier · G2 · PCMag
Consumer electronicsRTINGS · Tom's Guide · TechRadar · CNET
BeautyAllure · Byrdie · Glamour
Home & kitchenFood Network · Serious Eats · Good Housekeeping
Apparel & footwearOutdoorGearLab · RunRepeat
Smart homeCNET · Security.org
Online educationCoursera · Class Central · Udemy

Plus Reddit and YouTube, top-three cited sources in nearly every industry.

The engines even prefer different kinds of sites. ChatGPT and Perplexity lean on independent reviews and comparison sites; Google's AI Overviews and AI Mode lean far more on brand- and vendor-owned pages. Reddit/YouTube-style content is a quarter of Google AI Overviews' citations but almost none of Copilot's.

AI cites who wrote about you, not you.

Which sites are you missing from?

Because we captured the full text of every cited page, we can do the thing that actually matters: for any brand, show the cited sites its competitors appear on and it does not — a ranked "get featured here" list. Here's a real one for ClickUp in software:

Site AI citesAI citesDurabilityClickUp on it?
reddit.com279durable✓ present
techradar.com211moderate✓ present
zapier.com161niche✓ present
pcmag.com121moderateGAP · pitch here
nerdwallet.com105moderateGAP · pitch here
forbes.com103durableGAP · pitch here
g2.com89nicheGAP · pitch here

That output is the earned-media plan: the exact authority sites to get ClickUp featured on so AI starts recommending it — ranked, and tagged by whether the placement is durable (deep in the training data, lasting) or retrieval-dependent.

Winning search rankings isn't enough

Nearly three-quarters of what AI cites doesn't rank on Google's first page.

We captured the ordinary Google results for every query alongside the AI answer. Only 26% of AI citations come from a domain on Google's first page; 73% come from outside the top ten entirely — Reddit threads, YouTube videos, niche sites that don't rank but do get cited.

You can't just win search rankings and expect AI to cite you.

There's a flip side worth naming honestly: domains that do rank #1 on Google also get cited by AI 93% of the time. That's a strong overlap — though it's mostly because authoritative sites tend to both rank and get cited, not proof that ranking causes the citation. Either way, chasing rankings alone leaves most of the AI-citation pool untouched.

There's no "optimizing for AI." There are six different jobs.

The engines agree only a third of the time — and each gives a different answer every time you ask.

EngineBrandsSourcesAnswers w/ brandsSame twice?
Google AI Overviews3.51071%84%
Google AI Mode5.82591%62%
Gemini4.91086%54%
ChatGPT4.91390%54%
Perplexity5.01089%53%
Copilot4.6593%49%

Two things jump out. First, there's no single number to plan around: the source count runs from 5 (Copilot) to 25 (Google AI Mode) — it's an engine-by-engine question. Second, and bigger: ask the chat engines the identical question twice and roughly half the recommended brands change. AI recommendation isn't a fixed ranking; it's more like a lottery you can improve your odds in. For anyone tracking their "AI visibility," a single check is meaningless.

One check is noise. Measure across engines, multiple times.

Baked-in vs. borrowed brands

By joining recommendations to the AI's training data, we can split every brand in two: recommended and deeply present in the training data — an incumbent the model knows cold — or recommended despite being nearly absent from it, winning purely on what the engine is reading right now.

Baked in — model knows themBorrowed — winning on live visibility
Bose · Bosch · ADP · Glossier · WordPressTP-Link Tapo · SE Ranking · Petlibro · Omnisend · Orthofeet

A brand-new company can win AI recommendations today — on visibility, not fame.

These "borrowed" brands are recommended heavily while almost absent from the training data — a sign that current visibility, not incumbency, is driving the wins. It's the same story the industry-level finding tells, where 85% of recommendations already go to brands outside the top five.

To test that head-on, we did something only an open model allows. We took OLMo 2 — the one capable AI whose exact training data is public — and asked it the same buyer questions with its web access switched off, so it could answer only from memory. It recommended the corpus-heavy incumbents 4.6× more often than the borrowed brands, and it named none of the five borrowed brands above — not SE Ranking, TP-Link Tapo, Omnisend, Petlibro or Orthofeet — a single time from memory. They win inside the live engines while a model trained on the open web doesn't know them from memory at all. That's the cleanest evidence we have that the borrowed wins come from what the engines are reading right now, not from fame.

Honest note

The OLMo test is a clean behavioral check on one open 7-billion-parameter model — it shows the mechanism, but OLMo isn't ChatGPT or Gemini, so it can't prove what those specific closed models "knew." (Even for incumbents a small model's memory is partial — OLMo named about 39% of the baked brands from memory, not all of them; the borrowed rate was 9%.) For the underlying memory-vs-retrieval mechanics measured directly across nine models, see our sister study, Where AI recommendations come from. The pattern holds either way.

Reword the question, change half the answer

Phrasing isn't a rounding error. It's a lever you control.

We ran a controlled test: take the same buyer intent, ask it several ways (a question vs. a keyword, formal vs. casual, synonyms), hold the meaning constant, and watch what changes. Rewording the same question changed roughly half the recommended brands. So the content and coverage you earn should target the specific ways your buyers actually ask — not one tidy keyword.

Being useful beats being famous

85% of AI recommendations go to brands outside their industry's top five.

A common fear is that AI just names the same two or three giants. It mostly doesn't — even the category leader captures only 2–8% of recommendations, and it takes 17 to 76 brands to make up half. The same holds for the sites AI cites: a sharp specialist like RTINGS gets cited far more than its fame would predict. The door is open for challengers — brands and publishers — in a way the "AI favors incumbents" narrative misses.

The playbook

The one sentence: AI recommends the brands written about on the sites it cites — so getting featured on those sites (earned media, digital PR) is the highest-leverage AI marketing move there is. How to execute:

  1. Pull your category's citation short list. Every industry has ~4–6 sites AI leans on. That's your target media list.
  2. Get into the roundups and reviews on those sites. AI reads "best X" listicles and comparison pages. Being in the roundup on NerdWallet or TechRadar beats a page on your own site.
  3. Build a real Reddit and YouTube presence — through genuine participation and creator relationships, not spam.
  4. Chase specialist coverage, and weigh durability. Placements on big platforms (Reddit, YouTube, Forbes) are the most durable; niche-specialist placements win now but are more retrieval-dependent — a portfolio, not a single bet.
  5. Measure across engines, repeatedly. Any single reading is noise.
  6. If you're a challenger, move now. 85% of recommendations already go outside the top five.

Earned media just became AI distribution

For a decade, "get covered on the sites your customers trust" was a brand and traffic play. Now it's how you get recommended by the AI that's making the buying shortlist. The brands moving first are getting baked into AI answers while their competitors are still optimizing for page one.

Two things we can do with this instrument:

First step, today: ask ChatGPT, Perplexity and Google AI Mode the top buyer question in your category. Note who they recommend and which sites they cite. If you're not on those sites, that's your roadmap.

Method & limits

Scale: ~1,000 buyer queries across 15 industries × 6 engines (ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, Google AI Mode, Gemini, Perplexity, Copilot) × 2 runs = 11,573 answers, collected July 2026; engines change monthly, so treat it as a dated snapshot. The training-data join is an association, not proof of cause — we use the open-web data that open models (OLMo-class) trained on as a stand-in for the closed engines' undisclosed data, so the baked-in/borrowed split is a strong proprietary signal, not a claim about what any specific model "knew." As a separate behavioral check we also queried OLMo 2 (whose training data is fully public) with retrieval off — see Finding 04 — which confirmed the borrowed brands aren't recommended from memory; that check is on one open 7B model, not the closed engines. Measurement care: brands and recommendations were extracted by a language model and can contain edge errors; brand names that double as common words can't be reliably counted in the training data, and we detected and removed those before finalizing any number; the smallest baked-in/borrowed examples ride on modest counts and should be read as illustrative. Sample: the 15 industries lean consumer and commerce; heavy-B2B, healthcare and local-services behavior may differ. Cross-industry claims are directional — 15 industries is a designed sample, not a census.

Disclosure: Fractl is a marketing agency, and this research supports client-facing tools and services we build and sell. Weigh the piece knowing the interest exists; the method is open and the numbers are checkable.