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

AEO Score

71

Strong Presence

Avg Prompt Score

62

across 742 prompts

AI Share of Voice

63%

across 721 prompts

Category Visibility

#5

in Identity & Access Management · of 81

Critical Issues

4

critical + high

Per-stage performance

🔍Discovery
584 category
Cited64%374/584
Share of voice54%avg
Engine consensus55%of engines
Competitors11.0avg/cited
Sentiment—no data
⚖️Evaluation
13 brand-level
Cited77%10/13
Share of voice77%avg
Engine consensus100%of engines
Competitors0.6avg/cited
Sentiment—no data
🛡️Trust
5 brand-level
Cited40%2/5
Share of voice40%avg
Engine consensus—
Competitors0.0avg/cited
Sentiment—no data
💰Conversion
5 brand-level
Cited80%4/5
Share of voice80%avg
Engine consensus100%of engines
Competitors1.3avg/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 Cyberark is visible in

6
  • Secrets Management4 of 22→
  • Identity & Access Management5 of 81→
  • Identity Provider9 of 36→
  • Cloud Security11 of 112→
  • IT & Service Management42 of 154→

Executive summary

CyberArk is highly likely to be cited by AI engines for evaluation-stage queries because it has strong third-party review authority (e.g., 220 G2 reviews with a 4.5/5 rating) and first-party comparison pages like “CyberArk vs Teleport” that give AI a direct evaluation surface. The single highest-ROI fix is to strengthen Structured Data + Technical AEO for evaluation queries (SoftwareApplication/FAQPage/aggregateRating) and ensure pricing/crawlability is AI-readable, so AI can cite CyberArk for “pricing” and “vs” prompts without relying on third parties.

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

Built for The Citation Economy