[unCited]
ProductCitation IndexAI InfluenceBlogBook
[unCited]/Ping Identity
ProductCitation IndexAI InfluenceBlogBook
Claim profile →

AEO Score

68

Strong Presence

Avg Prompt Score

80

across 532 prompts

AI Share of Voice

80%

across 516 prompts

Category Visibility

#4

in Identity & Access Management · of 81

Critical Issues

3

critical + high

Per-stage performance

🔍Discovery
361 category
Cited86%310/361
Share of voice72%avg
Engine consensus62%of engines
Competitors12.9avg/cited
Sentiment—no data
⚖️Evaluation
10 brand-level
Cited100%10/10
Share of voice100%avg
Engine consensus100%of engines
Competitors2.5avg/cited
Sentiment—no data
🛡️Trust
4 brand-level
Cited100%4/4
Share of voice100%avg
Engine consensus—
Competitors1.0avg/cited
Sentiment—no data
💰Conversion
4 brand-level
Cited75%3/4
Share of voice75%avg
Engine consensus—
Competitors1.7avg/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 Ping Identity is visible in

3
  • Identity Provider2 of 36→
  • Identity & Access Management4 of 81→
  • Cloud Security39 of 112→

Executive summary

Ping Identity is highly likely to be cited by AI engines for evaluation-stage IAM/IAM-adjacent queries because it has strong third-party review authority (e.g., 106 G2 reviews with a 4.4/5 rating) and clear analyst/enterprise signals (Gartner Peer Insights profile exists). The single highest-ROI fix is to strengthen first-party evaluation surfaces for AI (especially SoftwareApplication/FAQPage coverage and crawlable comparison/pricing evaluation blocks) so brand-aware queries like “Ping Identity vs Okta” and “Ping Identity pricing” can be answered from pingidentity.com rather than only from third parties.

Based on audit of pingidentity.com · May 5, 2026

Built for The Citation Economy