> ## Documentation Index
> Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://docs.qwairy.co/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further.

# Which AI providers mention my brand the most (and the least)?

> Use the Performance Dashboard provider table, GEO Matrix, and Compare > By Provider to pinpoint which AI models champion your brand and which systematically omit it.

<Info>
  **TL;DR** — Not all AI providers treat your brand the same: you can dominate on Perplexity and be completely invisible on ChatGPT. Go to **Cockpit > Overview** and scroll to the **Performance by AI Provider** table to see Brand Mention Visibility, Source Citation Visibility, Sentiment, and Position per provider side by side. Then open **Cockpit > Compare > By Provider** to see who is winning on each platform while you are losing. Pro tip: a large provider spread (e.g., 55% on one vs 4% on another) is almost always a content gap on the sources that specific provider trusts — not a general SEO problem.
</Info>

## The Question

> **"Which AI providers mention my brand the most — and the least?"**

Not all AI search engines are equal. ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Claude, and AI Overview each draw on different training data, different web indexes, and different source hierarchies. Your brand can dominate on one platform and be entirely invisible on another. Knowing exactly where each platform stands lets you focus your GEO efforts where they will have the most impact.

**You might also be wondering:**

* "Why does ChatGPT mention my brand but Perplexity never does?"
* "Which provider gives my brand the best sentiment score?"
* "How do I know which AI provider my audience actually uses?"

***

## Where to Go in Qwairy

<Steps>
  <Step title="Start here: Cockpit > Overview">
    Navigate to **Cockpit > Overview** — scroll past the headline cards to the **Performance by AI Provider** table.
    Each row is one provider. Columns show Brand Mention Visibility, Source Citation Visibility, Average Sentiment, and Average Position for that provider.
    This table gives you the clearest side-by-side comparison without any extra configuration.
  </Step>

  <Step title="Go deeper: Cockpit > GEO Matrix">
    Navigate to **Cockpit > GEO Matrix** and read the matrix column by column.
    Each column is one AI provider. Scan vertically to see which topics a provider consistently misses for your brand.
    Use the **Topic/Tag** filter to zoom into a single strategic theme and see which providers cover it well and which do not.
  </Step>

  <Step title="Go deeper still: Cockpit > Compare > By Provider">
    Navigate to **Cockpit > Compare > By Provider**.
    This view adds the competitive layer: for each provider, you see your Brand Mention Visibility alongside each competitor's rate.
    Use this to answer "on GPT-5, who is winning while I am losing?" — and immediately understand the competitive stakes of each provider gap.
  </Step>

  <Step title="Automate: MCP tool get_provider_breakdown">
    Connect via the **Qwairy MCP server** and call `get_provider_breakdown` for:

    * Programmatic access to provider-level visibility data
    * Integration into internal dashboards, Slack alerts, or weekly digest automations
    * Real-time provider comparison without opening the Qwairy UI
  </Step>
</Steps>

***

## What to Look For

### Performance by Provider Table — Performance Dashboard

This is the fastest way to spot provider imbalances. A healthy brand shows relatively consistent Brand Mention Visibility across providers. A large spread — for example, 55% on Perplexity but 4% on GPT-5 — signals a platform-specific problem, usually a content or citation gap on sources that provider trusts.

| Element                                | What it tells you                                                         |
| -------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| **Brand Mention Visibility per row**   | How often your brand appears in answers for that provider                 |
| **Source Citation Visibility per row** | Whether that provider links back to your content — critical for authority |
| **Average Position per row**           | When listed alongside competitors, where you rank on that platform        |
| **Average Sentiment per row**          | How each provider describes your brand — positive, neutral, or negative   |

### GEO Matrix — Column-by-Column Reading

Reading the GEO Matrix column by column turns "GPT-5 is weak" into "GPT-5 is weak specifically on pricing, integration, and security topics." That specificity is what drives actionable content briefs.

> **Pro Tip**: Export the GEO Matrix as CSV and sort by a single provider column ascending to produce a ranked list of topics where that provider ignores your brand. Hand this list directly to your content team.

### Compare > By Provider — Competitive Context

The Performance Dashboard shows your numbers in isolation. Compare > By Provider shows the same numbers with every competitor alongside. If a competitor has 40% Brand Mention Visibility on Claude while you have 8%, that is the gap to close — not just "improve Claude visibility" as an abstract goal.

### Filters That Help

| Filter          | How to use it for this question                                                                       |
| --------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| **Period**      | Use 30d to catch recent changes; use 90d to confirm whether a provider gap is structural or temporary |
| **Topic / Tag** | Narrow to one topic to see if a provider gap is category-specific or universal                        |
| **Competitor**  | In Compare > By Provider, select individual competitors to make the gap analysis less cluttered       |

***

## How to Interpret the Results

### Good result

Brand Mention Visibility within 15 percentage points across all providers you monitor. No provider sitting at 0%. Source Citation Visibility present on at least one provider, ideally the one most used by your audience.

### Needs attention

One or more providers at 0% Brand Mention Visibility while others are above 30%. This is not a general visibility problem — it is a provider-specific gap, almost always traceable to specific source domains that provider relies on where your brand is absent, outdated, or inaccurate.

<Warning>
  Comparing raw mention rates across providers without accounting for the number of prompts run per provider can be misleading. Providers you have monitored with fewer prompts will naturally show more volatile numbers. Check the prompt count in the provider table before drawing conclusions from a very low or very high outlier.
</Warning>

***

## Example

> **Scenario**: You are the CMO of a cybersecurity SaaS. The quarterly board deck needs a breakdown of AI visibility by platform.

1. Open **Cockpit > Overview** and screenshot the provider table. GPT-5 shows 31% Brand Mention Visibility, Perplexity shows 47%, Google AI Overview shows 12%, Claude shows 0%.
2. Navigate to **Cockpit > GEO Matrix**, filter by the "endpoint security" topic tag, and read the Claude column. Every cell is empty — Claude never mentions your brand for any endpoint security prompt.
3. Open **Cockpit > Compare > By Provider** and filter to Claude. Your top three competitors show 38%, 29%, and 22% visibility on Claude while you show 0%. This confirms the gap is not Claude-wide — Claude mentions the category, just not you.
4. Check **Monitor > Citation Sources** filtered to Claude to identify which domains Claude cites for endpoint security. These become your target publications for a PR and content outreach push.

***

## Go Further

<CardGroup cols={3}>
  <Card title="Export provider breakdown as CSV" icon="download" href="/documentation/workspace/exports">
    Export your per-provider mention rates and visibility scores as CSV for offline analysis
  </Card>

  <Card title="Per-provider trend charts" icon="database" href="/looker-studio/sources/prompt-performance">
    Build per-provider trend charts in Looker Studio using the prompt-performance data source
  </Card>

  <Card title="Query by provider programmatically" icon="terminal" href="/developers/endpoints/performance">
    Use the performance endpoint to filter visibility data by specific AI provider via API
  </Card>
</CardGroup>

## Related Questions

<CardGroup cols={2}>
  <Card title="How visible is my brand across all AI providers?" href="/use-cases/visibility/how-visible-is-my-brand-in-ai">
    Get your overall AI visibility score before breaking it down by platform
  </Card>

  <Card title="Why does ChatGPT recommend my competitor instead?" href="/use-cases/providers/why-chatgpt-recommends-competitor">
    Diagnose the root cause of a provider-specific competitive gap
  </Card>

  <Card title="Different scores across providers — why?" href="/use-cases/providers/different-scores-across-providers">
    Understand the structural reasons behind cross-provider variation
  </Card>

  <Card title="What position does my brand appear in?" href="/use-cases/visibility/what-position-does-my-brand-appear">
    Combine provider visibility with ranking position for a fuller picture
  </Card>
</CardGroup>