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

AEO Score

58

Growing Presence

Avg Prompt Score

51

across 438 prompts

AI Share of Voice

51%

across 416 prompts

Critical Issues

6

critical + high

Per-stage performance

🔍Discovery
370 category
Cited49%181/370
Share of voice47%avg
Engine consensus36%of engines
Competitors1.0avg/cited
Sentiment—no data
⚖️Evaluation
14 brand-level
Cited64%9/14
Share of voice64%avg
Engine consensus—
Competitors0.2avg/cited
Sentiment—no data
🛡️Trust
7 brand-level
Cited29%2/7
Share of voice29%avg
Engine consensus—
Competitors0.0avg/cited
Sentiment—no data
💰Conversion
7 brand-level
Cited14%1/7
Share of voice14%avg
Engine consensus—
Competitors0.0avg/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 Glean is visible in

5
  • AI Search4 of 59→
  • Knowledge Base32 of 114→
  • AI Chatbots39 of 72→
  • AI Agents50 of 128→
  • Wiki & Docsnot yet measured→

Executive summary

Glean is highly likely to be cited for category shortlists because it has strong G2 presence (143 reviews, 4.7★) and active enterprise customer-story pages with measurable outcomes. The biggest AI-citation risk is evaluation-stage comparison and pricing: first-party “[Glean] vs Guru/Notion/Coveo/Kore.AI” pages and crawlable tiered pricing appear missing or not discoverable, which blocks direct-answer eligibility for prompts like “How does Glean compare to Guru?” and “How much does Glean cost?”. Highest-ROI fix: publish/ensure indexable first-party comparison pages for each competitor and a publicly crawlable pricing page (tiers/prices) so AI engines can cite Glean directly for evaluation queries.

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

Built for The Citation Economy