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

AEO Score

66

Strong Presence

Avg Prompt Score

16

across 2162 prompts

AI Share of Voice

16%

across 2162 prompts

Category Visibility

#1

in Live Chat · of 120

Critical Issues

4

critical + high

Per-stage performance

🔍Discovery
1363 category
Cited18%243/1363
Share of voice12%avg
Engine consensus58%of engines
Competitors24.9avg/cited
Sentiment—no data
⚖️Evaluation
7 brand-level
Cited100%7/7
Share of voice100%avg
Engine consensus100%of engines
Competitors1.4avg/cited
Sentimentpositive8+ / 13~ / 0−
🛡️Trust
4 brand-level
Cited100%4/4
Share of voice100%avg
Engine consensus100%of engines
Competitors0.8avg/cited
Sentimentpositive3+ / 9~ / 0−
💰Conversion
1 brand-level
Cited100%1/1
Share of voice67%avg
Engine consensus67%of engines
Competitors1.0avg/cited
Sentimentneutral0+ / 2~ / 0−

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 Intercom is visible in

11
  • Customer Service & Support1 of 132→
  • AI Chatbots2 of 71→
  • Feedback Management3 of 160→
  • Workflow Automation23 of 129→
  • AI Agentsnot yet measured→

Executive summary

Intercom is strongly positioned for AI citation in evaluation-stage queries because it has a large G2 presence (3,851 reviews) and publicly crawlable pricing with explicit tiers and per-seat/per-outcome pricing. The biggest risk pattern is conversion-stage “Intercom pricing / plans” and evaluation-stage “Intercom vs [competitor]” where AI engines need consistent first-party, crawlable structured content (e.g., SoftwareApplication/FAQPage) and robust crawlability signals beyond marketing pages.

Based on audit of intercom.com · May 28, 2026

Built for The Citation Economy