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

AEO Score

63

Growing Presence

Avg Prompt Score

3

across 1645 prompts

AI Share of Voice

3%

across 1626 prompts

Category Visibility

#39

in AI Chatbots · of 72

Critical Issues

7

critical + high

Per-stage performance

🔍Discovery
1083 category
Cited5%59/1083
Share of voice3%avg
Engine consensus34%of engines
Competitors17.6avg/cited
Sentiment—no data
⚖️Evaluation
12 brand-level
Cited58%7/12
Share of voice58%avg
Engine consensus100%of engines
Competitors1.0avg/cited
Sentiment—no data
🛡️Trust
6 brand-level
Cited100%6/6
Share of voice100%avg
Engine consensus100%of engines
Competitors1.8avg/cited
Sentiment—no data
💰Conversion
6 brand-level
Cited33%2/6
Share of voice33%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 Capacity is visible in

7
  • Contact Center25 of 72→
  • Customer Success27 of 82→
  • Help Desk27 of 96→
  • Customer Service & Support33 of 156→
  • AI Chatbots40 of 72→

Executive summary

Capacity is highly likely to be cited for evaluation-stage queries because it has strong G2 presence (285 reviews, 4.4★) and first-party comparison-style content exists (e.g., “Zendesk vs. Capacity” and “Freshdesk vs. Zendesk” pages). The single highest-ROI fix is to add/expand first-party “[Capacity] vs Intercom” and “[Capacity] vs Zendesk” pages that clearly position Capacity first (to unlock the exact comparison prompts) and to ensure structured data (SoftwareApplication + FAQPage) is present on those evaluation pages.

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

Built for The Citation Economy