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

AEO Score

74

Strong Presence

Avg Prompt Score

88

across 421 prompts

AI Share of Voice

88%

across 413 prompts

Category Visibility

#2

in Expense Management · of 108

Critical Issues

4

critical + high

Per-stage performance

🔍Discovery
273 category
Cited99%270/273
Share of voice90%avg
Engine consensus68%of engines
Competitors7.4avg/cited
Sentiment—no data
⚖️Evaluation
7 brand-level
Cited100%7/7
Share of voice100%avg
Engine consensus—
Competitors2.7avg/cited
Sentiment—no data
🛡️Trust
1 brand-level
Cited100%1/1
Share of voice100%avg
Engine consensus100%of engines
Competitors5.0avg/cited
Sentiment—no data
💰Conversion
2 brand-level
Cited100%2/2
Share of voice100%avg
Engine consensus100%of engines
Competitors2.5avg/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 Expensify is visible in

1
  • Expense Management2 of 108→

Executive summary

Expensify is highly likely to be cited by AI engines for evaluation-stage expense management queries because it has strong G2 authority (5,637 reviews, 4.5★) and first-party comparison content for key rivals like Navan and SAP Concur. The single highest-ROI fix is to strengthen structured-data coverage for B2B evaluation queries (SoftwareApplication/FAQPage) across the pages that answer pricing and comparison prompts, so AI engines can cite them reliably for “How much does Expensify cost?” and “How does Expensify compare to …?”

Based on audit of expensify.com · Jun 7, 2026

Built for The Citation Economy