4,656 answers from 3 answer engines, measured every day on real commercial prompts. Every percentage here has a denominator you can check.
One answer from one engine on one day. Every percentage on this page is a fraction of this number, including answers that cited nothing at all.
Individual links, so an answer citing four sources contributes four. The ranking counts answers rather than links, so one page linked repeatedly cannot inflate its own standing.
Domains cited at least 5 times, and cited for several independent businesses rather than only one. The long tail below that is measured but not published, so no single niche can be mistaken for the web.
The share of all analysed answers that cited this domain at least once, across every engine in the index.
A single blended ranking hides the most useful thing in this dataset: the same source can be a quarter of one engine's citations and a rounding error on another.
Cited 14× more often by Google AI Overviews
Cited 66× more often by Google AI Overviews
Every widely-quoted study of AI citations puts Wikipedia at or near the top for ChatGPT. This one does not, and the reason matters more than the ranking.
Published studies have put Wikipedia’s share of ChatGPT citations anywhere between roughly 8% and 48%. Those studies disagree with each other by a factor of six, and none of them states the mix of questions behind the number.
That mix is the whole answer. Wikipedia is what an engine reaches for when asked what something is. It is not what it reaches for when asked which product to buy. Every prompt in this index is the second kind, and Wikipedia lands at rank 30, in 0.6% of ChatGPT answers.
The check that the method is sound is Reddit: this index puts it in 18.6% of Google AI Overviews answers, against the roughly 21% widely reported elsewhere. Close agreement where the question types overlap, and a wide gap exactly where they do not.
Ranked by citation share: the percentage of analysed answers that cited each domain at least once, across every engine. Click a source for its daily history.
| # | Source | Share of all answers | ChatGPT | Google AI Overviews | Google AI Mode |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 16.1% | 0.3% | 24.0% | 25.0% | |
| 2 | 8.4% | 1.3% | 18.6% | 6.7% | |
| 3 | 3.2% | 0.1% (provisional, below the reporting threshold) | 8.0% | 2.1% | |
| 4 | 3.0% | 2.0% | 4.0% | 3.1% | |
| 5 | 2.9% | 2.2% | 4.3% | 2.4% | |
| 6 | 1.8% | 0.6% | 4.7% | 0.6% (provisional, below the reporting threshold) | |
| 7 | 1.8% | 0.1% (provisional, below the reporting threshold) | 3.9% | 1.6% | |
| 8 | 1.7% | 4.2% | 0.7% | <0.1% (provisional, below the reporting threshold) | |
| 9 | 1.6% | 1.5% (provisional, below the reporting threshold) | 2.0% | 1.5% (provisional, below the reporting threshold) | |
| 10 | 1.6% | 0% | 3.2% | 1.7% | |
| 11 | 1.5% | 3.3% | 1.0% (provisional, below the reporting threshold) | 0.1% (provisional, below the reporting threshold) | |
| 12 | 1.5% | 0% | 4.2% | 0.6% | |
| 13 | 1.3% | 1.9% | 1.3% | 0.6% (provisional, below the reporting threshold) | |
| 14 | 1.1% | 1.2% | 1.3% | 0.9% | |
| 15 | 0.8% | 0% | 1.4% | 1.1% | |
| 16 | 0.7% | 1.4% | 0.3% | 0.3% (provisional, below the reporting threshold) | |
| 17 | 0.6% | 1.6% (provisional, below the reporting threshold) | 0.3% (provisional, below the reporting threshold) | <0.1% (provisional, below the reporting threshold) | |
| 18 | 0.6% | 0.3% | 0.8% | 0.8% | |
| 19 | 0.5% | 1.4% | 0% | 0% | |
| 20 | 0.5% | 0.4% (provisional, below the reporting threshold) | 0.6% | 0.4% (provisional, below the reporting threshold) |
Share is the percentage of analysed answers that cited the domain at least once, counting each answer once however many times it linked there. A domain enters the table on at least 5 citations, and only once it has been cited for several independent businesses. Cells marked † fall under that on the individual engine and are shown for contrast rather than as a rate.
Daily share across all engines. The chart switches to a seven-day rolling average once two weeks of history exist.
Each engine has its own citation habits. These pages rank sources by that engine's own rate, not by a blended average.
1,617 answers analysed, averaging 7.1 cited sources each. Cites microsoft.com in 4.2% of answers.
See ChatGPT sources1,418 answers analysed, averaging 6.9 cited sources each. Cites youtube.com in 24.0% of answers.
See Google AI Overviews sources1,618 answers analysed, averaging 5.1 cited sources each. Cites youtube.com in 25.0% of answers.
See Google AI Mode sourcesThe whole index is free to download and free to republish with a link back. Charts are embeddable on any site, and they update themselves as the data does.
What the numbers mean, how they were measured, and how they compare with what else has been published.
Across 4,656 AI answers measured over the last 6 days, the five most cited domains are youtube.com, reddit.com, facebook.com, play.google.com, apps.apple.com. youtube.com leads, appearing in 16.1% of all analysed answers. The full ranking is the table above, and it is rebuilt every day.
No, and the gap is the most striking thing in this data. The engines agree on almost nothing at the top of the ranking. Google's AI Overviews and AI Mode lean heavily on user-generated video and forums, while ChatGPT reaches for vendor documentation and technology press. A single blended list of "sources AI cites" averages that difference away and tells you very little.
Rarely, on the commercial questions in this index. Reddit appears in 1.3% of ChatGPT answers here, against 18.6% of Google AI Overviews answers. Reddit is one of the most cited domains on the web overall, but that reputation comes mostly from Google's AI surfaces rather than from ChatGPT.
Because these are buying-intent prompts, not general-knowledge ones. Published studies have put Wikipedia's share of ChatGPT citations anywhere between roughly 8% and 48%; in this index it appears in 0.6% of ChatGPT answers and ranks 30 overall. Wikipedia is what an engine reaches for when asked what something is. It is not what it reaches for when asked which product to buy.
Each engine runs its own retrieval step before it writes an answer, then attributes the pages it drew on. What that step favours differs sharply by engine and by the kind of question asked, which is why the same domain can hold a quarter of one engine's citations and almost none of another's. This index measures the outcome rather than the mechanism: what actually got cited, how often, on which surface.
Share is the percentage of analysed answers that cited a domain at least once. An answer linking to the same source four times counts once, so a verbose citation block cannot inflate a domain's standing, and answers that cited nothing at all stay in the denominator. A domain has to clear at least 5 citations across several independent businesses before it is published.
Every day. Each engine is queried daily and the whole index is rebuilt from scratch, so the tables reflect the most recent measurement rather than a study run once and left to age. The current window covers 4,656 answers.
Yes. The full dataset is available as JSON and CSV, free to reuse and republish with a link back, and every source page carries an embeddable chart that updates itself.
Every figure on this page has a denominator you can check. Here is exactly what was counted, and what this dataset is not.
RankSpot runs its customers’ tracked prompts against each answer engine every day and records the sources each answer cites. One measurement is one answer from one engine on one day: 4,656 of them, Sep 1, 2026 to Sep 6, 2026.
Share is the proportion of analysed answers that cited a domain at least once. An answer linking to a source four times counts once, so a single verbose citation block cannot inflate a domain’s standing. Answers that cited nothing at all stay in the denominator.
A domain has to be cited at least 5 times, and cited for several independent businesses rather than only one, before it is published. Subdomains fold into their registrable domain, so mobile and desktop hosts count as one source. App-store listings stay separate because being cited there is a different fact. Google.com itself is left out: Google’s AI surfaces link back into Google as part of how they render an answer, which describes the interface rather than which publishers earn citations. YouTube stays, because it is cited as a source in its own right.
These are real commercial prompts written by real businesses tracking their own visibility, not synthetic queries invented to fill a leaderboard. That is the strength of the dataset and also its shape: it skews toward buying-intent questions in the categories RankSpot customers sell into, across many businesses and several languages. It is not a random sample of everything people ask.
Every engine is queried daily and the whole index is rebuilt from scratch each day, so the tables reflect the most recent measurement rather than a snapshot taken once and left. Daily figures on a single engine move on small numbers, so the charts switch to a seven-day rate once there is enough history to compute one honestly.
Updated daily. Last refreshed September 6, 2026. The full dataset behind every table is available as JSON and CSV, free to reuse with attribution.
RankSpot researches, writes and publishes daily, and sends you the short list of what's left. Free for 3 days.
Start free trial