[unCited]
ProductCitation IndexAI InfluenceBlogBook
[unCited]/Appcues
ProductCitation IndexAI InfluenceBlogBook
Claim profile →

AEO Score

66

Strong Presence

Avg Prompt Score

74

across 530 prompts

AI Share of Voice

77%

across 507 prompts

Category Visibility

#2

in Product Experience · of 73

Critical Issues

4

critical + high

Per-stage performance

🔍Discovery
415 category
Cited93%385/415
Share of voice86%avg
Engine consensus52%of engines
Competitors3.8avg/cited
Sentiment—no data
⚖️Evaluation
19 brand-level
Cited21%4/19
Share of voice21%avg
Engine consensus100%of engines
Competitors5.0avg/cited
Sentiment—no data
🛡️Trust
8 brand-level
Cited50%4/8
Share of voice50%avg
Engine consensus100%of engines
Competitors5.0avg/cited
Sentiment—no data
💰Conversion
8 brand-level
Cited50%4/8
Share of voice50%avg
Engine consensus100%of engines
Competitors5.0avg/cited
Sentiment—no data

Cited rate · share of voice · engine consensus · sentiment, broken out by buyer-journey stage. Sentiment is the net positive−negative skew across engines that cited the brand at this stage.

Categories Appcues is visible in

1
  • Product Experience2 of 73→

Executive summary

Appcues is highly likely to be cited for evaluation-stage queries because it has strong G2 presence (342 reviews, 4.6★) and a publicly accessible pricing page with clear plan tiers. The biggest AI-citation risk is missing/uncertain first-party structured evaluation assets (SoftwareApplication/FAQPage/robots+llms.txt verification) and the lack of clearly indexed first-party “[Brand] vs Pendo/WalkMe” pages (vs only third-party-style comparison content). Highest-ROI fix: add/verify SoftwareApplication + FAQPage schema on product/pricing and create/ensure indexable first-party pages that directly answer “How does Appcues compare to Pendo?” and “How does Appcues compare to WalkMe?” with Appcues-first positioning.

Based on audit of appcues.com · Apr 2, 2026

Built for The Citation Economy