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

AEO Score

63

Growing Presence

Avg Prompt Score

72

across 215 prompts

AI Share of Voice

73%

across 199 prompts

Category Visibility

#13

in Procurement & Sourcing · of 56

Critical Issues

5

critical + high

Per-stage performance

🔍Discovery
170 category
Cited74%126/170
Share of voice68%avg
Engine consensus55%of engines
Competitors7.5avg/cited
Sentiment—no data
⚖️Evaluation
6 brand-level
Cited100%6/6
Share of voice100%avg
Engine consensus100%of engines
Competitors2.3avg/cited
Sentiment—no data
🛡️Trust
4 brand-level
Cited100%4/4
Share of voice100%avg
Engine consensus—
Competitors0.3avg/cited
Sentiment—no data
💰Conversion
8 brand-level
Cited88%7/8
Share of voice88%avg
Engine consensus100%of engines
Competitors2.9avg/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 GEP is visible in

1
  • Procurement & Sourcing13 of 56→

Executive summary

GEP is highly likely to be cited by AI engines for evaluation-stage procurement/source-to-pay queries because it has strong enterprise analyst signals (Gartner Magic Quadrant Leader claims) and substantial third-party review presence (e.g., G2 and TrustRadius for GEP SMART). The single highest-ROI fix is to add/strengthen first-party, brand-led evaluation surfaces (especially SoftwareApplication/FAQPage structured Q&A and indexed comparison/pricing pages) so AI can cite GEP directly for “vs/alternatives/pricing” prompts rather than relying on third parties.

Based on audit of gep.com · May 8, 2026

Built for The Citation Economy