AI answers now compete with (and complement) classic SERPs.
To win brand visibility, you need to know where your pages can be included and cited across Perplexity, ChatGPT Search, Gemini, and Claude—and how each UI turns citations into clicks.
This guide defines the metrics that matter and compares platforms side‑by‑side using Tacmind’s Platform Evaluation Grid.
AI visibility metrics that matter
- Inclusion rate – % of prompts where your domain appears inside the answer surface (overview/inline citation/sources).
- Citation share – Share of all citations pointing to your domain (by engine).
- Prominence – Position/weight of your link (primary vs secondary; inline vs below).
- Click opportunity – UI elements that encourage leaving the answer (inline links, sources panel, "dig deeper").
- Retention risk – Follow‑up prompts that keep users in the AI flow (lower click‑out).
- Evidence clarity – How clearly the platform exposes sources, affecting trust and selection bias.
Platform summaries
Perplexity
Perplexity composes an answer and adds numbered citations linked to the original sources. That explicit source UI makes inclusion/citation measurable and click‑friendly. See How Perplexity works.
ChatGPT Search
OpenAI documents that ChatGPT Search shows inline citations in the text and a Sources panel you can open to inspect and click through. This makes presence and prominence auditable. See ChatGPT search help.
Gemini
Google explains that Gemini Apps sometimes show sources and related links and let users double‑check responses. Visibility exists but isn’t guaranteed in every reply. See Gemini help: view sources & double‑check.
Google AI Overviews (Search context)
Google’s AI Overviews present a summary with links to explore more on the web, creating measurable inclusion and click opportunities when your page is linked. See Google AI Overviews.
Claude
Anthropic added web search to Claude; when the web is used, Claude provides direct citations so users can fact‑check sources. See Claude web search announcement.
Anthropic also launched a Citations API for document‑grounded answers in your own app—see Citations API.
Platform Evaluation Grid
Practical takeaways by use case
- Publisher/brand seeking referral traffic: Prioritize Perplexity and ChatGPT Search prompt sets first; both consistently expose clickable sources.
- Teams validating AI summaries: Incorporate Gemini’s double‑check pattern in QA—even when links don’t appear by default.
- Enterprise assistants & in‑product search: If you ship your own UX, consider Claude’s Citations API to enforce document‑level attribution.
- Google ecosystem visibility: Where AI Overviews link to your content, log Inclusion + Prominence as part of GEO/AEO tracking.
FAQs
Which single platform is “best” for AI visibility?
There isn’t one. For consistent, measurable citations, Perplexity and ChatGPT Search are easiest to track; Gemini and Claude can be excellent but are more conditional (sources not always shown / web mode required).
Do all Gemini answers include sources?
No. Gemini Apps sometimes show sources/related links and provide a double‑check feature.
Does Claude always cite sources?
Only when web search is enabled (or when you implement the Citations API in your app).
What should I measure weekly?
Inclusion rate, citation share, prominence, and click opportunity per engine—plus follow‑up retention risk.
How do I increase citation likelihood?
Publish concise, verifiable definitions and decision tables with on‑page links to primary sources; these patterns align with how platforms surface sources.
Was this helpful?
