FFrontier AEO trackerV5 across situations · September 2026

A LATENT SPACE RESEARCH PROJECT

When AI makes the shortlist,
who gets chosen?

We asked frontier AI agents to recommend products across 133 categories. This is an open window into their choices: the favorites, the disagreements, and the reasons behind them.

AEO means answer engine optimization—understanding how products show up in AI answers. Here, you can go beyond a mention count and see what agents actually recommend.

THINK YOU KNOW WHAT AI WILL PICK?

Play the shortlist.

Start with three familiar AI products. Guess the order, reveal the rankings, and skip anything you don’t know.

Guess the rankings →

WHAT SURPRISED US

Visibility is only the beginning.

All notable findings ↗

A high mention rate can hide a low chance of being chosen. A familiar favorite can disappear when you change the model. The interesting part is understanding why.

01 / MENTIONED ≠ CHOSEN

Everyone knows Kysely.
Almost nobody picks it first.

Mentioned100%
First choice2.4%

In ORM / database tools, Kysely appears in 42 of 42 validated answers, but is the first choice in just 1. Being part of the conversation is different from winning the recommendation.

Explore Kysely’s visibility gap ↗

02 / THE MODEL MATTERS

One model’s favorite is
another model’s objection.

LaunchDarklyRecommended by Fable.
Scenario-level objections from Astra.

Claude Fable chooses LaunchDarkly in all six feature-flag frames. Astra shifts toward ConfigCat and raises objections to LaunchDarkly for the scenario. A pooled score hides this disagreement.

Compare the model evidence ↗

03 / ACCESS IS PART OF THE STORY

A citation doesn’t tell you
the whole retrieval story.

Can models read
your website?Successful requests. Failed requests.
The pages that made it into answers.

The Sources report lets you inspect a domain by model, including cases where the same URL both succeeded and failed. These are saved observations from the study, not a live website test.

Look up your website ↗

Findings describe this study’s saved answers. Rates measure observed recommendations, not product quality or market share. Each link leads to the underlying research view.

MAKE THE RESEARCH YOUR OWN

Pick a question. Follow the evidence.

THE EXPERIMENT, IN PLAIN ENGLISH

Same buyer scenario.
Different ways of asking.

We ran real AI agents through their native tools and harnesses, saved their answers, then assessed the products they recommended, mentioned, or objected to.

Read the full methodology ↗
  1. Start with 133 category-level buyer scenarios.

    From coding agents and AI infrastructure to business software and professional services, each category gives the agent a concrete decision to make.

  2. Ask 7 model configurations in 6 ways.

    A baseline plus direct fit, practitioner choice, comparison, tradeoffs, and conditional recommendation. These are related phrasings of one scenario, not independent trials.

  3. Validate the answers and resolve product names.

    5,566 usable answers out of 5,586 saved. Product identities and roles are reviewed against the evidence; 20 excluded answers stay out of score denominators.

  4. Score the recommendation, then explain it.

    Separate first choices, alternatives, supporting mentions, and objections. Average across available configurations and link the results to prompts, answers, and research notes.

FROM A SCORE TO AN EXPLANATION

Find out where your product stands.

Start with a category. See who appears. Then inspect why.

Explore 133 categories ↗