AI Search Statistics
How Often Do AI Engines Actually Cite a Website?
KinetixSEO is an SEO and AI-citation (GEO) checker, and the data below comes from its own production GEO tracking — not a survey, not a vendor claim. Refreshed monthly as more tracked checks land. Rows covering fewer than 30 distinct tracked keyword and prompt pairs are marked as not yet statistically reliable rather than hidden.
Data through August 2026 , last updated
Series began August 2026; next snapshot 2 Oct.
Key findings
What the latest reliable data shows
- In August 2026, AI engines cited a tracked site in 22.9% of 617 tracked citation checks across all providers combined.
- Perplexity had the highest citation rate of any tracked engine with a reliable sample in August 2026, at 42.7% across 89 checks.
- Other had the lowest citation rate of the tracked engines with a reliable sample in August 2026, at 0% across 44 checks.
- Of the AI citations with sentiment classified in August 2026, 19.9% were positive toward the cited site.
- This benchmark series has produced statistically reliable data (at least 30 distinct keyword and prompt pairs) for 1 month, starting in August 2026.
Monthly citation rate by provider
The series is just getting started
This benchmark only has 1 month of data so far — not enough yet to chart a trend. The table below shows every row we have.
| Month | Provider | Citation rate | Sample size | Sentiment (pos / neu / neg) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| August 2026 | All providers combined | 22.9% | n=617 checks, — keyword-prompt pairs | 28 / 113 / 0 |
| August 2026 | Claude (Anthropic) | 18.1% | n=155 checks, — keyword-prompt pairs | 15 / 13 / 0 |
| August 2026 | Claude (web search) | 0%* | n=12 checks, — keyword-prompt pairs (sample size too small — not yet statistically reliable) | 0 / 0 / 0 |
| August 2026 | Microsoft Copilot (Bing) | 0%* | n=6 checks, — keyword-prompt pairs (sample size too small — not yet statistically reliable) | 0 / 0 / 0 |
| August 2026 | Google AI Overviews | 0%* | n=9 checks, — keyword-prompt pairs (sample size too small — not yet statistically reliable) | 0 / 0 / 0 |
| August 2026 | Gemini (Google) | 25.2% | n=147 checks, — keyword-prompt pairs | 7 / 30 / 0 |
| August 2026 | Other | 0% | n=44 checks, — keyword-prompt pairs | 0 / 0 / 0 |
| August 2026 | ChatGPT (OpenAI) | 24.5% | n=155 checks, — keyword-prompt pairs | 0 / 38 / 0 |
| August 2026 | Perplexity | 42.7% | n=89 checks, — keyword-prompt pairs | 6 / 32 / 0 |
* Provisional — fewer than 30 distinct keyword and prompt pairs, not yet statistically reliable. Sentiment classification was also added part-way through tracking, so the three sentiment counts don't necessarily sum to the sample size for earlier months.
Methodology
Where this data comes from
Every row is aggregated from real GEO citation checks run against tracked keywords across KinetixSEO customer accounts — the same checks that power each customer's own AI Visibility dashboard. A citation rate built from fewer than 30 distinct tracked keyword and prompt pairs in a given month is marked unreliable rather than dropped, so a thin early month never silently disappears from the series once volume catches up. See the full scoring methodology.
Series break, September 2026: AI citation checks moved from every night to once a week per tracked keyword and prompt, part-way through that month. From then on each month holds roughly a seventh as many checks per keyword, so check counts before and after the switch are not comparable. Citation rates remain a share of checks run, but treat any move across September 2026 as a possible effect of the change rather than a trend. From the same change, a row is only called statistically reliable when it covers at least 30 distinct tracked keyword and prompt pairs, rather than 30 checks.
This dataset is published under a CC BY 4.0 license and is free to reuse with attribution. Reliable rows only — download the CSV.
FAQ
Frequently asked questions about this data
What counts as an AI citation in this data? +
A check counts as a citation when the AI engine's answer names or links the tracked domain in response to a tracked keyword. These are the same automated checks that power each KinetixSEO customer's own AI Visibility dashboard, not a survey or a vendor-reported estimate.
Why do some rows show a sample size warning instead of a rate? +
A (provider, month) row needs checks from at least 30 distinct tracked keyword and prompt pairs before its citation rate is treated as statistically reliable on this page — repeated checks of one keyword are not independent evidence. Thinner rows are still shown, marked, rather than hidden — hiding them would make an early month look like a gap once volume catches up.
How often is this data updated? +
A new monthly snapshot is computed on the 2nd of each month, aggregating the previous full calendar month of tracked citation checks. The "last updated" date near the top of this page reflects when that snapshot was actually computed, not when this page's template last changed.
Can I reuse this data? +
Yes — this dataset is published under a CC BY 4.0 license and is free to use with attribution. A CSV export of the reliable rows is linked from the methodology section below.
Does a higher citation rate mean an AI engine is easier to rank in? +
Not directly — citation rate here measures how often each engine cited any tracked site for its tracked keywords, not how any single site ranks. Engines also differ in how often they cite sources at all for a given query type, which affects the aggregate "all providers" rate independent of any one site's visibility.
Track your own AI citation rate
Start with a free GEO Readiness check, then track whether ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, Google AI Mode, Gemini, Claude, Perplexity, Microsoft Copilot, Grok and DeepSeek actually cite your site over time.