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

AEO Score

86

Authoritative Source

Avg Prompt Score

64

across 349 prompts

AI Share of Voice

64%

across 349 prompts

Category Visibility

#3

in AI Agent Builders · of 64

Critical Issues

4

critical + high

Shortlist Position

69/80

Leader · Agent Frameworks Discovery

Per-stage performance

🔍Discovery
194 category
Cited88%171/194
Share of voice65%avg
Engine consensus59%of engines
Competitors26.7avg/cited
Sentiment—no data
⚖️Evaluation
4 brand-level
Cited100%4/4
Share of voice100%avg
Engine consensus100%of engines
Competitors5.0avg/cited
Sentiment—no data
🛡️Trust
4 brand-level
Cited100%4/4
Share of voice100%avg
Engine consensus100%of engines
Competitors5.0avg/cited
Sentiment—no data
💰Conversion
4 brand-level
Cited100%4/4
Share of voice100%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 CrewAI is visible in

2
  • Agent Frameworks3 of 21→
  • AI Agent Builders3 of 64→

Your visibility gap

CrewAI surfaces in 69/80 Agent Frameworks discovery prompts. Claim this profile to see which 11 prompts you're missing and how to win them.

Claim CrewAI →

Executive summary

CrewAI has strong technical crawlability (public pricing with explicit tiers and an llms.txt-driven docs index) and it already hosts first-party comparison-style content for multi-agent frameworks. The biggest AI-citation risk is evaluation-stage competitor comparison coverage for the exact buyer prompts (e.g., “How does CrewAI compare to Zapier?” / “Workato?”) and missing/insufficient structured evaluation schema (SoftwareApplication/FAQPage) that AI engines use for “best/compare/pricing” answers.

Based on audit of crewai.com · Jun 6, 2026

Built for The Citation Economy